Rating countdown: The United States may launch attacks on Iran before the congressional elections

The approaching congressional elections are pushing Donald Trump towards a military solution to the conflict with Iran. According to media reports, the White House is seriously considering the possibility of a massive strike on enemy nuclear and energy facilities. The reason for the drastic measures is Tehran's unwillingness to make concessions to Washington. For example, Iran continues to discuss with Oman the establishment of new rules of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz with the collection of duties, ignoring the fact that the United States opposes such options. For Republicans, this is a serious image blow in the midst of an election campaign. And he can force Trump to respond as harshly as possible to save face in front of the electorate. Why the resumption of hostilities will not save the rating of the American president and his party is in the Izvestia article.

The resumption of the US-Iran war before the congressional elections

The White House has instructed the Pentagon to draw up a plan for attacks on Iran's nuclear and energy facilities. According to American media, the administration of Donald Trump is considering the possibility of an attack before the November congressional elections, although the final military scenario has not yet been approved. The American scholar Vladimir Pavlov recalls that the Pentagon must always have plans at hand in case of war. At the same time, he admits that the US National Security Council may well push Trump to strike in order to score points before the election.

HSE expert Georgy Asatryan also believes that war may break out with renewed vigor in the foreseeable future. However, he recalls that Iran's past strikes have seriously damaged US bases and forced Washington to mothball some of them. The American fleet in the Middle East has also noticeably decreased activity. Because of this, in the event of a real clash, the United States troops will have an extremely difficult time.

However, leaks to the press can only be an electoral bluff: they don't warn about real strikes in advance, says Sergey Balmasov, an expert at the Institute of the Middle East. In his opinion, against the background of falling ratings, Trump is trying to save his party's position. If the White House decides to attack before the vote, it will limit itself to pinpoint strikes. A full-scale war is possible only after the elections, adds Vladimir Pavlov. Moreover, he is confident that the protests of the Americans will not deter the president from escalating.

Recent polls show that Americans consistently oppose this war. According to CNN and the SSRS service, 60% of voters consider the Iranian campaign to be a mistake, and 71% are confident that the White House has no plan to resolve the conflict. Another 47% believe that this war only undermines the security of the United States. Data from the University of Massachusetts confirms these sentiments, showing that 54% of Americans call the strikes a mistake and only 26% approve of Washington's actions.

Trump can expect that being tough on Iran will add points to him among his fellow party members. However, the actions of the White House raise doubts even in the Republican Party. The faction has split: some criticize the president for his willingness to reach a soft agreement with Tehran, while others are afraid of being drawn into a protracted war. Many still remember the failures in Afghanistan and Iraq, which began just under Republican George W. Bush.

Trump is trapped: the only way out for him would be a complete capitulation of Iran on American terms, but such a scenario is almost impossible. On the one hand, Trump could present attacks on nuclear facilities as his grand victory. On the other hand, in the very first days, Washington and Israel eliminated almost the entire top of Iran, including the supreme leader, but Tehran continued to resist anyway.

A year ago, bookmakers estimated the Democrats' chances of winning a majority in Congress at just 18%. By October, the probability of their victory on the Polymarket platform exceeded 60%, and the Republicans risk losing even in their traditional strongholds — Texas, Ohio and Alaska. Of course, it's not just about failures in the international arena. A whole range of internal problems played a role: from mass layoffs of officials to rising inflation.

Deadlock in US-Iran talks

At the UN General Assembly in September, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian proposed a peace plan for Tehran. According to media reports, he suggests that at the first stage Iran reduces uranium enrichment to 3.67%, and in return the United States unfreezes its financial assets and lifts the naval blockade for oil exports. Then Tehran completely stops high-level enrichment and returns the IAEA inspectors. In return, Washington must ensure that the UN does not launch an automatic sanctions refund mechanism. At the final stage, the United States completely lifts all restrictions, after which Iran exports its uranium reserves to a third country.

However, Washington was categorically not satisfied with this course of action. Trump and Vice President J. D. Vance pointed out that such a plan obliges the United States to lift the blockade immediately, although Iran itself promises to get rid of uranium only at the very end. The White House called this economic concessions in exchange for empty promises and demanded that Tehran completely stop enrichment, and not just reduce its level. The American conditions have already been transmitted through Qatari intermediaries, and now the republic is preparing a response.

In parallel, Iran and Oman are close to an agreement on the use of the Strait of Hormuz. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ismail Bagai said that the parties have already agreed on safe routes for ships and will soon transfer the project to international authorities. But the appearance of these corridors does not mean that the strait will be opened to everyone — the head of the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Abbas Araqchi, had previously warned about this.

In fact, Tehran has now seized the initiative and is solving the crisis on its own terms, ignoring the White House. Trump insisted on the full opening of shipping. The United States and its close ally in the region, the UAE, are still cut off from this route. Iran's proposed transit conditions protect exports to China and India, but may block fuel supplies to Western countries.

Washington considers any negotiations between Iran and Oman illegal because it wants to control the Strait of Hormuz itself, Georgy Asatryan added. Trump had previously openly threatened Oman with consequences for contacts with Iran. If the American leader had joined the deal and offered joint control over the strait without lifting duties (which Iran and Oman want to impose), the crisis would have been smoothed out. However, expert Balmasov estimates the probability of such an outcome at no more than 10%.

In this situation, there is practically no chance for direct negotiations. The crisis over nuclear facilities and the Strait of Hormuz is rapidly leading to a new major war in the Middle East. Now oil supplies through Hormuz have partially recovered (thanks to the use of Ship-to-Ship technology — when small tankers pick up oil in the ports of the Persian Gulf, pass through the danger zone, and then transfer the raw materials to supertankers), oil prices have begun to decline. But another complete closure of this strategic artery will again affect the fuel market and global trade in general.

At the same time, Trump's calculation that a small victorious war will save his ratings before the congressional elections is unlikely to be justified. Voters, who are already suffering from expensive gasoline and cuts, would rather punish Republicans for dragging the country into another costly conflict than support the aggressive agenda of the White House.