US ultimatum to Iran: what comes next?
US President Donald Trump has upped the pressure on Iran to reach an agreement in the dispute over Tehran's nuclear programme. If no solution is found within 10 to 15 days "bad things" will happen, he warned. Iran has announced a "resolute and appropriate" response in the event of an attack. Commentators discuss the consequences of a US attack for the region.
Tehran hopes to benefit from war
Political scientist Vali Nasr analyses the situation in the Financial Times:
“There is an emerging consensus in Tehran that Iran will not win anything at the negotiating table. It will instead have to accept war, prepare to manage it, and hope that conflict eventually leads to the change it is seeking – by exhausting the US to the point that it abandons the pursuit of future aggression and agrees to a more favourable nuclear deal. ...The US expects the people to rise up again and topple their leaders. Iran's rulers hope for the opposite: that war will spark patriotic fervour and nationalism will prevail.”
Aiming to control the regime's decline
From an American perspective there are several arguments in favour of an attack, Corriere della Sera puts in, with an analysis by Michael Rozenblat of the US think tank Atlantic Council in mind:
“The regime's internal systemic weaknesses – hyperinflation, water shortages and widespread corruption – together with the recent protests point to an inexorable decline. But passively waiting for its collapse is not a sustainable strategy for safeguarding America's regional interests. An active approach, including military intervention, would enable Washington to steer the transition, ensure a favourable post-regime environment and deprive Russia and China of the opportunity to exploit a power vacuum in Iran.”
No plan for the day after
Der Standard argues against a US attack:
“Finally getting rid of the mullah regime would be a blessing for the people of the country, a relief for many neighbouring states and the elimination of an existential threat for Israel. But all this only applies if it is possible through a swift, targeted strike, which currently seems highly unlikely. And only if there is a viable plan for the day after. If such a plan exists, it is not apparent at present. This must be counted among the good arguments against an attack.”
Prospect of a long war
The situation is very serious, warns Phileleftheros:
“If there is an attack, it will certainly not be limited to one strike or a series of strikes. Experts in Israel estimate that a possible attack could last for weeks, which would also justify the huge number of forces that the Americans have assembled in the region. Many are hoping, both in Israel and elsewhere, that the Iranian regime will come to its senses and the worst will be avoided. However, we can't really bet on this.”