US President Donald Trump said he considers military action against Iran a “proportional” response to the attack on the Saudi oil campaign Saudi Aramco. He announced this at a meeting with reporters on September 16.

“You ask, will such an answer be proportional? I think so, ”- so Trump answered the corresponding question of the journalist.

At the same time, the American leader said that although the White House considers Iran to be responsible for the attack on Saudi Aramco’s facilities, he wants to avoid a war with Tehran.

“I do not want a war with anyone, but we are prepared more than anyone,” the US president added.

Speaking with reporters, Trump also noted that the degree of Iran’s participation in the attacks has yet to be established.

“We are considering this at the moment. There are many options, but I am not looking at them now. We want to determine who did this. We are talking with Saudi Arabia and other neighbors. We discuss it all together. Let's see what happens, ”said the owner of the White House.

At the same time, the head of the Pentagon, Mark Esper, said that the United States and its partners are exploring options for steps to counter Iran.

“The United States military, together with an interagency group, is working with our partners on how to respond to unprecedented attacks and defend a rule-based international order that undermines Iran,” Esper wrote on September 16.

Konstantin Blokhin, an expert at the Center for Security Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, believes that with such statements, Trump is trying to put pressure on Iran and force him to sit at the negotiating table on his terms. However, he also has to restrain the hawks in his administration, who really want to push the US into war.

“But for Washington now, striking or a war with Iran will be a disaster. It will also hit US allies in the region, primarily Saudi Arabia and Israel. Such a war will require the deployment of a huge military contingent and large-scale actions, which will be very expensive for all participants, ”the expert said in a conversation with RT.

The expert added that in the run-up to the US election for Trump, any military exacerbation would be political suicide.

“He will be immediately accused of being a bloodsucker and a war-raiser ... Especially since Trump won the 2016 elections, in particular, due to allegations that the United States, instead of investing in internal infrastructure, spent an astronomical amount in the Middle East, ”the political scientist explained.

Guilty Appointment

Recall, on September 14, Saudi Aramco oil plants in eastern Saudi Arabia were attacked by drones. The objects of the attack were the Abkaik processing complex and the large Khurais oil field. This led to a decrease in oil production in the kingdom by 5.7 million barrels per day - that is, the production of the kingdom was halved.

The responsibility for the attack was claimed by the Hussite Yemeni rebels.

  • Hussite Yemeni rebels
  • AFP
  • © Mohammed Huwais

Since 2014, a military conflict has continued in Yemen between the Hussites and the coalition of Arab states under the auspices of Saudi Arabia. The Hussites are a Shiite movement, so members of the Arab coalition accuse Iran, a Shiite state, of supporting and actually directing the actions of the Hussites.

Soon after the attack on Saudi oil facilities, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said that Iran was behind them, but did not provide any evidence.

“Tehran is behind about 100 attacks on Saudi Arabia, while (Iranian President Hassan. - RT ) Rouhani and (Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad. - RT ) Zarif pretend to be engaged in diplomacy. Amid all the calls for de-escalation, Iran launched an unprecedented attack on world energy supplies. There is no evidence that the attacks were from Yemen, ”the head of American diplomacy wrote on Twitter on September 14th.

Tehran denied Washington's allegations. Abbas Mousavi, a spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, said that such statements by Pompeo are part of a "maximum pressure" policy with respect to Iran.

According to the director of the US Study Fund. Franklin Roosevelt at Moscow State University, Yuri Rogulev, Washington simply needs to present Tehran in the worst possible light in order to substantiate its withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Action Plan for the Iranian Nuclear Program. In 2018, Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the treaty and resumed sanctions against Iran.

“The American decision to unilaterally withdraw from the agreement put in a difficult situation not only Iran, but also the rest of the countries that signed this document,” the expert recalled.

A similar point of view is shared by Konstantin Blokhin.

“Washington’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal is perceived by the entire international community, with the exception of Saudi Arabia and Israel, as an aggressive step. Now the Americans want to move their arrows to Iran in order to demonize it and so that the subsequent sanction pressure on Tehran would be legitimate in the eyes of the international community, ”the expert said.

War with reservations

Accusations against Iran of the actual attack on Saudi Arabia - one of the main US allies in the region - were made just a few days after the Trump administration left one of the main supporters of an open armed conflict with Iran, national security adviser John Bolton, experts recall .

  • Former National Security Advisor John Bolton
  • Reuters
  • © Yuri Gripas

Bolton, whom the American media called one of the leading "hawks" and neoconservative politicians in the Trump administration, once called for the bombing of Iran.

So, Bolton previously stated that the only way to deter Iran’s nuclear program is through bombing, similar to the Israeli Air Force’s attack on the Osirak reactor in Iraq in 1981 and the reactor in Syria in 2007.

September 10, John Bolton was fired from his post. The American media, citing sources in the Trump administration, reported that disagreements arose between the president and Bolton on a number of issues, including Washington’s exchange rate with respect to Iran.

Konstantin Blokhin in an interview with RT recalled that the former US Presidential Advisor on National Security advocated active military action against a number of countries.

“The US president, who is not a supporter of military interventions, fired national security adviser Bolton because he was trying to drag America into a protracted and costly war with Iran, North Korea, Venezuela,” the expert said.

According to Yuri Rogulev, Trump does not want to start a war with Iran, however, despite Bolton’s resignation, his administration still has hawks who would like to lead the United States along such a path. Now, the political scientist notes, the president has to balance between his political course and the desires of the "party of war" - this is largely what triggered Trump's contradictory statements against Iran.

“There were people in the Trump administration like Bolton who were ready to start a war with Iran, but the US president himself would not want this, because this contradicts his position. However, he, like any other president, acts in a system of checks and balances and cannot simply ignore the interests of the hawks. It is difficult to imagine now which point of view will prevail. It is possible that the "hawks" will sell a limited strike on Iran, as was the case with Syria. The US is walking along a very sharp blade, balancing on the brink of war, ”concluded Yuri Rogulev.