Fears of the Middle East sliding into a comprehensive nuclear conflict are increasing as the deadline set by U.S. President Donald Trump for Tehran approaches. Trump warned of "opening the gates of hell" on Iran if an agreement to end the war is not reached within 48 hours.
This threat marks an unprecedented escalation in tensions between Washington and Tehran. Dr. Laqaa Maki, a senior researcher at the Al Jazeera Center for Studies, believes that the American threat goes beyond traditional pressures, describing it as "serious and dangerous."
Details of the Event
Maki clarified during his participation in the analytical studio on Al Jazeera that the core danger lies in the potential targeting of the Iranian Bushehr nuclear reactor. Such a move could push Tehran to activate its "eye for an eye" strategy by launching a direct strike on the Israeli Dimona reactor.
Maki warned that this scenario would not only mean the destruction of facilities but could also lead to a radiological disaster affecting the Gulf and the Middle East, turning the conflict into a "slippery slope" that could exceed imagination.
Background & Context
These threats come at a sensitive time, as tensions between Iran and the United States have escalated since the outbreak of war last February. Some analysts point out that Russia's evacuation of its experts from the Bushehr reactor, after coordination with Israel, reflects that targeting this reactor is a strong possibility among the options for America and Israel.
There is also talk of potentially targeting the Bushehr reactor without causing a radiological leak, but any mistake during the execution of the attack could lead to catastrophic consequences.
Impact & Consequences
Conversely, Abdullah Bandar Al-Otaibi, an academic in international affairs at Qatar University, ruled out Trump's likelihood of launching a major military strike on Tehran immediately after the deadline. He noted that the direction of the U.S. president's decisions is towards financial markets, making him hesitant to embark on any adventure that could cause sharp fluctuations in the markets.
Al-Otaibi pointed out that the tone of the American threat aims to strip any "face-saving" from the Iranian side, forcing it to surrender completely, which Tehran vehemently rejects, considering that any retreat would mean the collapse of its sovereignty.
Regional Significance
Despite the threatening tone, some forecasts suggest that Tehran might respond to pressures through a "partial de-escalation" in the Strait of Hormuz. The French-Pakistani initiative seeks to open the strait to ships carrying essential goods, which could create a "rift" in the Western position and disrupt the American justification for a strike.
In light of these circumstances, analysts discuss the existence of legal and political dilemmas surrounding the American decision, most notably the War Powers Act of 1973, and the division in Congress over funding a war that could cost up to $1.5 trillion.
Ultimately, the current scene appears to be a game of mutual pressure, with Trump seeking to raise the economic cost on Iran before the stock markets open, while Tehran bets on maximum resistance and refusal to surrender, believing that any retreat would lead to the complete collapse of its defense system.