{"id":10162,"date":"2026-02-15T16:43:01","date_gmt":"2026-02-15T16:43:01","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/2026\/02\/15\/six-reasons-why-trump-should-choose-the-military-option-in-iran-atlantic-council\/"},"modified":"2026-02-15T16:43:01","modified_gmt":"2026-02-15T16:43:01","slug":"six-reasons-why-trump-should-choose-the-military-option-in-iran-atlantic-council","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/2026\/02\/15\/six-reasons-why-trump-should-choose-the-military-option-in-iran-atlantic-council\/","title":{"rendered":"Six reasons why Trump should choose the military option in Iran – Atlantic Council"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/p>\n
\n

The possibility of a military confrontation between Washington and Tehran is on hold, at least for now, as the two countries have begun talks<\/a> mediated by Oman. However, a strategic breakthrough from these talks\u2014which according to US President Donald Trump should be resolved in the coming month<\/a>\u2014remains unlikely without substantial concessions by at least one party on topics previously considered out of the scope of negotiations. Iran maintains that its ballistic missile program and the support it provides its regional proxy network are non-negotiable\u2014precisely the areas where the Trump administration demands drastic concessions.<\/p>\n

That means diplomacy could stall or break down completely. So what will Trump, who has been steadily building up<\/a> military forces in the region, do then?<\/p>\n

There are two primary pathways he could take for a military strike. The first is a limited coercive strike\u2014i.e. against Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Basij militia compounds\u2014aimed at fulfilling Trump\u2019s red line<\/a> about killing protesters and forcing Iran back to negotiations from a weaker position. However, such a strike would probably have a limited effect on the regime\u2019s calculus and would not guarantee a manageable military confrontation, as Iran has stated that it is preparing to carry out retaliatory measures<\/a> following any strike.<\/p>\n

The second option would be a larger campaign aimed at achieving fundamental changes in the current regime\u2019s calculus\u2014such as accepting strict limitations on its ballistic missiles and proxies\u2019 activity\u2014or even bringing about regime change. For this scenario to be successful, the United States will need to present a credible threat to the current regime\u2019s survival. This requires a sustained, well-coordinated military campaign supported by regional allies, forcing the regime to choose between \u201cdrinking the chalice of poison<\/a>\u201d for survival or facing a conflict that threatens its very existence.<\/p>\n

The pursuit of regime change carries significant risks, including the potential for internal fragmentation into armed factions or even full-scale civil war. Nevertheless, the benefits of fundamentally changing\u2014or even eliminating\u2014the Islamic Republic could outweigh the risks if the alternative is an emboldened<\/a>, undeterred Iran.<\/p>\n

Here are six strategic reasons why a decisive military campaign is the right move:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. A unique moment to reshape the Middle East<\/strong>: Iran is at its weakest point since the 1979 revolution after recent protests, June\u2019s twelve-day war with Israel, and the drastic degradation of its terror network<\/a>. The Iranian defense doctrine\u2014comprised of a nuclear program, conventional power, and regional proxy network\u2014failed to deter Israel and the United States from striking it, effectively exposing the regime as a paper tiger.\u00a0A decisive campaign against the regime could be the key to advancing US regional efforts that seem stuck at the moment, from regional integration through the Abraham Accords<\/a>, to bringing Iranian-backed countries like Lebanon and Iraq closer to Western influence.<\/li>\n
  2. The moral imperative<\/strong>: Current diplomatic efforts prioritize the nuclear issue while overlooking the regime\u2019s brutal crackdown on protesters<\/a>, which brought the current tensions to a boiling point in the first place. Reports coming out of Iran are heartbreaking. While official<\/a> figures claim \u201conly\u201d 3,117 people killed, some estimates are far higher, ranging from over 6,000<\/a> to over 30,000 people killed in two days<\/a>. Trump\u2019s promise<\/a> to \u201ccome to [the] rescue\u201d of the Iranian people shouldn\u2019t be a lip service, but rather a testament to the United States\u2019 moral leadership. Negotiating is a prize to this regime, as talks could provide it with a much-needed lifeline in sanctions easing and improving its domestic and international legitimacy.<\/li>\n
  3. The credibility dilemma:<\/strong> Opting against military force may avoid immediate conflict but risks comparisons to then US President Barack Obama\u2019s \u201cred line\u201d in Syria<\/a>. In 2013, Obama failed to respond militarily after the Assad regime used chemical weapons on its people, which the president had described as a \u201cred line.\u201d If Trump does not respond in this case, it could signal to Tehran that the Washington will blink under pressure as long as Iran remains resolved in its resistance.<\/li>\n
  4. The economic stakes for the United States\u2014and China<\/strong>: A different Iranian regime could reintegrate its massive energy reserves<\/a>\u2014the world\u2019s second-largest gas and third-largest oil deposits\u2014into Western markets. This aligns with the administration\u2019s view of expending US access to energy resources<\/a> as a key component in its foreign policy. The combination of ousting Nicol\u00e1s Maduro<\/a> in Venezuela and a regime change in Iran could severely disrupt China\u2019s energy security, as Beijing relied on both countries for as much as 30 percent<\/a> of its oil imports due to their discounted prices. Complicating China\u2019s economic calculus and shifting its focus could promote other US efforts vis-\u00e0-vis China, such as preventing full-scale conflict in the Taiwan Strait.<\/li>\n
  5. Skin in the game for the United States in Iran\u2019s future<\/strong>: Internal systemic failures brought about by the regime\u2014namely hyperinflation<\/a>, water scarcity<\/a>, and widespread corruption\u2014along with recent demonstrations suggest the regime is in a state of terminal decline. However, waiting patiently for the regime to collapse while watching from the sidelines isn\u2019t a sustainable strategy to promote US regional interests. Instead, a hands-on approach utilizing military force could allow the United States to actively navigate the situation, ensuring a favorable post-regime landscape while denying Russia and China the opportunity to exploit a power vacuum in Iran. This is not to say that the United States will necessarily need an ongoing presence with boots on the ground like in Iraq, but rather it should economically and diplomatically support opposition groups that could post an alternative to the current regime, backing them in their efforts to bring about positive change to the country.<\/li>\n
  6. The ongoing threat of Iran\u2019s nuclear program<\/strong>: While June\u2019s US strikes<\/a> on Iranian nuclear facilities were essential to stall an immediate Iranian breakthrough toward obtaining a nuclear weapon, they likely only rolled Iran\u2019s efforts back by a few months<\/a>. Iran has already stated it will continue<\/a> its nuclear program, and its recent work to fortify underground facilities<\/a> signals its refusal to abandon its nuclear ambitions. The current lack of monitoring<\/a> by the International Atomic Energy Agency could allow the regime to utilize enrichment as a dual-purpose tool: either overtly, to secure diplomatic leverage and deter US military action, or covertly, as an \u201cinsurance policy\u201d for regime survival. Trump has consistently<\/a> affirmed that he will not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons, and he should act on those words.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Pursuing negotiations at this juncture risks providing the regime with a vital political and economic lifeline at the very moment it is at its most vulnerable. The gap between Washington\u2019s and Tehran\u2019s core positions necessitates the use of force to restore US deterrent credibility and force Iran to make drastic changes or risk the regime\u2019s survival. In the current landscape, a decisive US-led coalition effort aimed at regime change may offer a more sustainable strategic outcome than a protracted diplomatic process that could end with a bad agreement and an emboldened Iran.<\/p>\n

    Michael Rozenblat<\/strong> is a visiting research fellow at the Atlantic Council\u2019s Middle East programs, from the Israeli security establishment. The views in this article are the author\u2019s own and do not necessarily reflect those of any other entity.<\/em><\/p>\n

    Further reading<\/h4>\n

    Image: Two uniformed members of the Iranian Basij paramilitary forces hold portraits of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during a ceremony marking the 47th anniversary of the victory of Iran’s Islamic Revolution at the shrine of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the Behesht-e Zahra cemetery in southern Tehran, Iran, on February 1, 2026, (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl\/NurPhoto)<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

    <\/main> <\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    The possibility of a military confrontation between Washington and Tehran is on hold, at least for now, as the two countries have begun talks mediated by Oman. However, a strategic breakthrough from these talks\u2014which according to US President Donald Trump should be resolved in the coming month\u2014remains unlikely without substantial concessions by at least one […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":10163,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10162","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10162","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10162"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10162\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/10163"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10162"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10162"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wpinitiate.com\/echo-test\/demo973e36f5\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10162"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}