Dem
47
GOP
53
Although the U.S. is not involved in the Israel-Iran war (yet), the fighting underway there could still have consequences for U.S. politics.
First, it takes the spotlight off Gaza. That in itself is significant.
Second, It is hard to believe that Donald Trump will come down on the side of Iran, which means that ultimately he will back Israel. This could put Democrats in a bind. They don't want to be see as backing Iran, but they also don't want to line up behind Trump. Reps. Steven Horsford (D-NV) and Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) have already come out backing Israel. On the other hand, Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA) and Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI) are calling for immediate de-escalation. So what will the Democrats do, except make feeble calls for peace that both sides will ignore? Not taking any stand could make them look weak.
Third, a war in the Middle East that Trump has no control over—and not much influence with either belligerent—makes HIM look weak. He said he would get a nuclear deal with Israel and Iran, but that seems increasingly unlikely. He wants to be the center of attention all the time and hates to look weak. If Israel wiped out Iran's nuclear capability without Trump's help, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would look strong and Trump would look weak. If both Democrats and Republicans come to see Trump as weak, that could affect the rest of his presidency.
Fourth, at first, the official U.S. line was that Israel went it alone, without the U.S. knowing about it in advance. Now Trump is trying to back out of that and is saying he knew about the Israeli attack all along. Not even knowing about something this big would make Trump look incompetent and out of the loop as well as weak. He certainly does not want that.
Fifth, the U.S. could get dragged into the war one way or another. This could put Trump in a bind, with isolationists like Tucker Carlson pulling him one way and hardliners like Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) pulling him the other way. Whatever he did would alienate some of Trump's allies and could fracture the Republicans.
Sixth, oil prices could spike, reigniting inflation and making it a political issue. If the war goes on for a while, that could spook the stock market and possibly lead to a recession.
These things aside, there could be even more impact depending on Israel's real goal here. Maybe that is just wiping out Iran's nuclear capacity. But maybe it is something much bigger: regime change. On Friday, Netanyahu said the attacks "will continue for as many days as it takes to remove the threat." But he didn't specify what "the threat" is. Is it Iran's potential nuclear weapons? Or is it the existence of the ayatollah-run Iranian government itself? If the latter, the war could certainly reshuffle the deck in the Middle East. Regime change might actually be the easier of the two. Much of Iran's nuclear infrastructure is deep under the ground where Israeli weapons can't hit it, but the leaders are above ground and easier targets. Trump supposedly told Netanyahu not to kill Iranian leaders, but that could well be a false flag to make Iranian leaders drop their guard and not be alert. Alternatively, it could be genuine, but Netanyahu might decline to take Trump's suggestion.
Reza Pahlavi, the son of the former Shah of Iran, is champing at the bit and would be quite pleased if all the ayatollahs could be killed or driven from the country and he could take their place as the new shah. Probably quite a few Iranians wouldn't mind that at all. Not to mention more than a few Arab leaders. If Israel pulled that off, the de facto leader of Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, would hop on his royal jet and zip off to Jerusalem to give Netanyahu a big hug. On the other hand, if the current regime fell, the new one could be even worse. Then the U.S. would have an even bigger problem with Iran than it has now. (V)