According to an exclusive report by the U.S. Wall Street Journal, U.S. President Donald Trump is considering a series of gradual military actions against Iran. This strategy would begin with limited initial strikes and could escalate to full-scale military operations aimed at overthrowing the Tehran regime if Iran refuses to cooperate. The report signals a potential reshaping of the power balance in the Middle East. President Trump has made it clear that he will decide on the next steps regarding Iran within 10 to 15 days.
Sources revealed that, if authorized, the first round of attacks could occur within days, targeting a small number of Iranian military or government facilities. However, this would not be a one-time operation but a carefully designed “escalation mechanism”: if Iran continues its nuclear enrichment activities after the initial strikes, the U.S. would gradually expand its military operations, potentially culminating in an attempt to overthrow the Tehran regime. This “submit or collapse” strategy pushes the Middle East to the brink of full-scale conflict.
Trump administration’s ‘gradual escalation’ strategy
The core of this military strategy is its “step-by-step escalation” design. The Trump administration aims to balance demonstrating military resolve with avoiding all-out war through precise control of force. The first stage of “limited strikes” would target carefully selected sites, including Iranian radar systems, air defense installations, Revolutionary Guard command centers, and certain nuclear-related facilities. The strikes are designed to send a clear warning to Tehran while avoiding triggering a large-scale Iranian retaliation.
Insiders suggest Trump may adopt a “gradually intensifying offensive” approach, beginning with small-scale actions to test Iran’s response before deciding whether to authorize larger attacks.
If the current regime in Tehran continues to resist, U.S. military objectives could shift toward “regime change,” meaning a transition from limited strikes to full-scale war.
Success
You are now signed up for our newsletter
Success
Check your email to complete sign up
Clear timeline
President Trump has set a clear timeline for potential military action. He initially stated he would decide on the next step regarding Iran within “10 days,” later telling the media that Iran has a maximum of “15 days” to reach an agreement.
According to the Wall Street Journal, senior aides repeatedly proposed options for “limited military strikes” to Trump. After weeks of deliberation, it remains unclear what Trump’s final plan will be. Officials noted that recent White House discussions have focused more on larger-scale military operations, reflecting differing views within the administration on how to handle Iran.
White House spokesperson Kelly declined to discuss specific actions, stating only that “only President Trump knows what he may or may not do.”
Middle Eastern allies and geopolitical chain reactions
U.S. allies in the Middle East face complex strategic calculations. Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates have long considered Iran a primary security threat and might outwardly support a tougher U.S. stance. However, these countries are also aware they could be Iran’s first targets for retaliation. Iran possesses significant asymmetric warfare capabilities, including ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, drones, and proxy networks across the region.
If a U.S.-Iran conflict breaks out, Iran is likely to leverage proxies such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthi forces in Yemen, and Shiite militias in Iraq to attack U.S. military bases, diplomatic facilities, and regional allies. A more serious threat is the potential blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, which could endanger roughly 20 percent of global oil shipments, trigger an international energy crisis, and cause major oil price volatility, severely impacting the global economy.
Some U.S. officials and security analysts have issued serious warnings regarding the military options under consideration. They argue that whether limited strikes or large-scale operations are executed, Iran may retaliate strongly, drawing the U.S. into a costly Middle East war. Critics note that military action may not fundamentally resolve the Iranian nuclear issue; even if some nuclear facilities are destroyed, Iran could rebuild its program post-conflict and might even accelerate nuclear development to secure the regime.
Historical lessons from U.S. military interventions in the Middle East are instructive. The 2003 Iraq War quickly toppled Saddam Hussein’s regime, but the subsequent occupation and reconstruction lasted years, causing heavy casualties and massive costs. The Afghanistan experience also shows that overthrowing a regime is relatively easy, but establishing a stable replacement government is extremely difficult. These lessons should serve as a crucial reference for decision-makers considering military action against Iran.
China and Russia’s Interests in the Middle East
Trump’s military considerations affect not only the Middle East but also global dynamics. China is a major buyer of Iranian oil, and Russia has deep military cooperation with Iran; a U.S.-Iran war would directly impact both countries’ interests in the region. Beijing may strongly condemn unilateral U.S. military action at the U.N. Security Council and could provide economic support to Iran. Russia may accelerate the provision of advanced air defense systems to Iran, complicating U.S. airstrikes.
The Trump administration’s consideration of a “gradual military strategy” against Iran represents a significant turning point in U.S. Middle East policy. In the coming 10 to 15 days, as Trump makes his final decision, the situation in the Middle East could change dramatically.
History will judge whether the decisions made by the Trump administration at this moment become a decisive factor shaping the future of the Middle East.
By Yang Tianzi
