Dem
47
GOP
53
When Donald Trump TACOed about destroying the 2,500-year-old Iranian civilization and gave the Iranians 2 weeks to sue for peace, he sent his top negotiators—J.D. Vance, son-in-law Jared Kushner, and his real estate buddy, Steve Witkoff—to Pakistan to talk (down) to the Iranians. What could possibly go wrong? Vance presented Trump's list of demands and told the Iranians to sign on the dotted line. One of the demands was unconditionally opening the Strait of Hormuz and giving up any claim to sovereignty over it. Another was giving up all their partially enriched uranium and the equipment to make more of it. For some reason, they didn't sign. Then Vance repeated the demands and the Iranians still wouldn't sign. This "negotiating" strategy tends to work best when the other side does not hold any cards. Such is not the case now. This went on for 21 hours, with Vance making dozens of calls to Trump all day. During this time, Trump was in Miami watching a UFC fight. Vance eventually gave up and went home.
This is crazy on so, so many levels. First, Vance was strongly against the war in the first place. He accurately predicted the consequences, including regional chaos, mass casualties, and the U.S. depleting its stock of munitions. Trump didn't listen to him. Now Vance (very unexpectedly) got the job of dealing with the mess. He has no experience in foreign policy and his idea of negotiation is "put out your list of demands and just keep repeating it until the other side gives in." There is no Plan B in case they keep refusing.
Second, the U.S. really needs to have some cabinet official who deals with other countries on a regular basis, something like the "foreign minister" other countries have. Maybe Congress could create such a position some day... oh wait, there IS a cabinet official whose job is dealing with other countries. That person is called the "Secretary of State." The position was created in 1789. Is it vacant now? Oh, no. Marco Rubio holds the position and has for a year. Why wasn't he the negotiator? Because he was in Miami with Trump watching the UFC fight. OK, then. Why bother to send a negotiator when you can send a bloviator?
Third, why was Trump at a UFC fight during these critical negotiations? Our guess is to show Iran how unimportant it is and how little he cared about the results. It was certainly intended to demean the Iranians, and it worked. If Trump wanted to get some results, he could have gone himself and been the lead negotiator. Iran obviously knew that Vance had no authority to agree to anything, hence the constant stream of calls to Trump. If Trump had gone personally, that would have shown some respect, and in an honor-shame culture like Iran has, that is a big deal. By contrast, as every negotiator knows, disrespecting the other side almost always guarantees failure. Trump went out of his way to humiliate the Iranians, and it worked—at least, if Trump wanted the negotiations to fail.
So, now what? Yesterday Trump said the U.S. will blockade the Strait of Hormuz. Huh? A naval blockade is an act of war—and remember, Congress has not authorized any wars lately. The goal was to open the Strait, not close it. Besides, the Strait is full of mines, Iran doesn't know where they are, and the U.S. doesn't have any minesweepers anymore. What's the point of a blockade if no tanker dares to enter the Strait on account of the mines? Maybe Trump is trying to show the Iranians who is the boss. Most books on negotiation emphasize telling the other side you understand their position and you are trying to help them as best you can, given your own needs. On CNN's State of the Union, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA) said: "I don't understand how blockading the Strait is somehow going to push the Iranians into opening it." Warner is not the only one asking this question.
At this point, Trump has several options to choose from, none of them pleasant for him. He could go back to Iran with his tail between his legs and try to restart negotiations, but at this point Iran feels empowered and is still not likely to give in without major U.S. concessions. One concession could be to unfreeze the billions of dollars in Iranian money frozen in U.S. and foreign banks. But Iran would probably use those funds to buy more weapons and munitions from China.
Alternatively, Trump could continue the bombing, but Round 1 didn't work and probably Round 2 won't either. Besides, the U.S. is running low on munitions and China and Russia are keenly aware of that. China knows the U.S. probably isn't able to help Taiwan fend off an invasion, even if it wanted to, and Russia knows the U.S. can't even sell munitions to the E.U. anymore to give to Ukraine because it needs them all itself. In short, when you kick a hornets' nest (Hormuz' nest?), the hornets get to decide when it is over.
Another option for Trump is to take his marbles and go home. That is what Iran wants, and the result would be Iran selectively letting ships through the Strait (after they found all the mines) and after the ship owners had paid tribute to Iran so Iran could pay China for more weapons and to rebuild the country. In this scenario, energy, gas, and fertilizer prices would continue to rise. This morning, the national average gas price at gasbuddy.com was $4.08/gal., down from $4.17/gal. last week but probably going up again.
We can't see any of these options being acceptable to Trump. But he's boxed in. He may have to choose which unacceptable option is the least unacceptable.
If John McCain or Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush were president, before attacking Iran in the first place, they would have called the guy who negotiated a deal with Iran in 2015—Barack Hussein Obama—and gotten his advice on dealing with the Iranians. But talking to people named Hussein is just not Trump's thing. Sorry.
And finally, what is the politics of all this? A lot depends on how long it goes on and how it ends. When it comes to Trump's misadventures, Americans seem to have the collective memory of a swarm of gnats. Maybe it's because he floods the zone with so much new stuff, the (barely) old stuff gets pushed out. But if the war is still unresolved by September, when early voting begins, a lot of people, including independents and people who voted for Trump because he promised no more forever wars in the Middle East, are going to vote for the Democrats to send him a message or at least are going to stay home.
Yesterday, Politico assembled a panel of their reporters who have been covering the war closely and asked them for their take. Here are some of their comments:
The conclusion is that Trump is in way over his head, had no idea Iran would close the Strait (even though Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine told him they would), and doesn't have any idea what to do next except bluster and blunder some more. (V)