"Trump has opened Pandora's box"

During the 2024 presidential campaign, President Donald Trump warned that Joe Biden or Kamala Harris (if she succeeded him) would lead the world into “World War III.” Today, Trump is putting that very warning to the test, risking making it a reality.

In a statement issued Saturday evening, Trump declared the US military strike on Iran a success. According to him, American bombs capable of penetrating bunkers had completely destroyed Iran's nuclear capacity.

It will take time to learn whether Iran and Israel themselves, the two main actors in a scenario not written by Trump but in which he now plays the leading role, will share the same assessment as the American president. But Trump hopes that his demonstration of formidable power will serve to end the conflict.

However, the decision to end the war is not in his hands.

How did Trump get here?

Whatever happens next, it’s worth remembering how the events that led Trump to this point unfolded. Ten days earlier, Benjamin Netanyahu had derailed plans for a nuclear deal with Iran with a series of devastating missile strikes. The Israeli prime minister declared that Iran was weaponizing its nuclear program and posed an existential threat.

Most international actors, including the American intelligence community, do not share this assessment with Netanyahu.

After this development, which undone efforts to reach the deal he wanted, Trump chose to embrace the Israeli line. He demanded Iran's unconditional surrender and declared that he could eliminate the country's supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, at any moment.

Iran did not bow to Trump's ultimatum. The de facto declaration of war he made on Saturday night was a direct consequence of this confrontation.

It is important to note that no one, including Donald Trump himself, knows what will happen next. It is easy to start a war, especially when you have the most powerful army in the world at your disposal. But wars only end when one side surrenders.

The old warning about the “fog of war” is particularly pertinent to today’s Middle East, where there are often more than just two warring parties. The enemy of your enemy may turn out to be your own enemy.

At one point, irritated after being outmaneuvered by the younger Netanyahu, Bill Clinton said to an adviser: “Who the hell is the superpower here?”

Trump's brief televised statement after the attacks was intended to show his control over the situation. But in reality, it was Netanyahu who was dictating developments. Even he, however, cannot predict how Iran will respond.

Netanyahu's interests do not entirely align with Trump's. The Israeli leader has made it clear that he aims to overthrow the Iranian regime. Trump, meanwhile, is demanding his surrender.

The path to Netanyahu's goal could be a harsh Iranian response that would force Trump to escalate the conflict, a scenario he threatened in his statement. The scenario that suits Trump would involve a soft Iranian response that would allow him to declare "mission accomplished."

But how this story will unfold, and who will determine whether Iran’s response is symbolic or deadly, is largely beyond Trump’s control. That leaves him as the most powerful military actor in the Middle East, but potentially hollow in influence. For true power is measured by the ability to shape events, and Trump is largely their captive.

Regardless of what happens next, Donald Trump’s bombing of Iran has already sealed his presidency both domestically and internationally. This is now Trump’s war. Surrendering Iran would be a resounding victory for him; but a full-scale war would risk sinking his term.

Among the many ironies, one of the most prominent is the fact that many of Trump's once vocal critics , especially the "Never Trumpers" who warned him about the dangers of his authoritarianism, are now supporting his strikes against Iran. They are willing to risk the consequences that a war could bring to Trump in the form of increased presidential power.

Meanwhile, another irony that stands out is the skepticism of Trump's allies from the "MAGA" movement, such as Steve Bannon, who see this new and potentially more dramatic chapter in the series of "permanent wars" as a betrayal of the president's promises to end them.

Only a naive person would take Trump's word for granted, given that he has repeatedly broken it. But one thing is certain: his dream of winning the Nobel Peace Prize seems increasingly out of reach.

Without consulting Congress and perhaps in violation of international law, Trump has taken a dangerous step that could be decisive for his political future. Whether he fully understands it or not, he is now committed to this endgame.

Ultimately, it is Iran and Israel that will have as much say as Trump himself in determining how and when this crisis ends./ Financial Times