Donald Trump's Dilemma: Engage Iran in Talks, or Join Israel's Missile Offensive?

In the past 20 months since Hamas killed nearly 1,200 people, Israel has been fighting in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen. On June 13, when Israeli jets attacked Iran, it became clear that all these earlier battles with Iran’s allies were building up to a big and serious clash between Israel and Iran.

The war between Iran and Israel could change the Middle East, just like earlier Arab-Israeli wars between 1948 and 1973. U.S. President Donald Trump is unsure whether to talk to Iran or attack it with missiles. The big question is: Will this be the only war that leads to peace and progress? Or will it be the start of many more wars that bring years of violence to the region?

Israel is worried that Iran might soon get nuclear weapons. Israel says it attacked now because Iran is secretly building a bomb while pretending to talk peace with the U.S. , Western intelligence  is not fully sure about this. But if Iran gets nuclear weapons, it could bully nearby countries without fear—just like Russia is doing to Ukraine. It could also cause other countries in the Middle East and elsewhere to start building their own nuclear weapons.

If Iran gets nuclear weapons, it would be very dangerous for Israel and the rest of the world. Donald Trump’s effort to stop this sends a clear message to other countries: don’t try to build nuclear weapons.

Israel’s Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has a serious problem. To stop the danger, he must either destroy Iran’s ability to make a nuclear bomb or make Iran stop wanting one. But going to war with Iran may not solve either problem. Even if Israel damages Iran’s nuclear buildings and delays the bomb, it can’t erase the knowledge Iran already has. In fact, attacking Iran may make its leaders even more determined to build a nuclear weapon.

Netanyahu hopes that the people of Iran will rise up and remove their current rulers. He believes a new government might be less strict, less aggressive, and less interested in nuclear weapons. But Israel can only create pressure—it cannot force a change in government by bombing. Also, no one can be sure if a new Iranian government would want peace with Israel or give up nuclear plans, which actually started long ago under the old king, the Shah.

In the end, the only thing Israel can fully control is delaying Iran from getting a nuclear bomb by damaging its nuclear work. But if Iran starts building again in a few years, Israel may have to attack once more. Each time, it will become harder to stop.

So, what should be done? The G7 leaders met in Canada and asked both sides to calm down. Some reports say Iran is open to talks. If diplomacy works, it would be the best solution. Unlike war, peaceful talks could stop Iran’s nuclear plans and build trust, making Iran less likely to rush for a bomb. That’s why many believe Donald Trump made a big mistake in 2018 when he pulled out of a nuclear deal with Iran, even though it wasn’t perfect.

In reality, making a deal with Iran will be very difficult. For the deal to work, Iran would need to give up all its highly enriched uranium, allow strict checks, and keep only a small part of its nuclear program. But will Iran’s leaders agree to such tough and embarrassing terms? Maybe—but only if they feel their rule is in real danger. Sensing this, Mr. Trump has demanded that Iran give up without any conditions, and his threats have even made some people leave Tehran out of fear.

Some experts who support strong action say the best way to pressure Iran is to delay talks and have the U.S. join Israel in attacking Iran’s nuclear sites. This could work better because America has powerful bombs that can destroy deep underground places like the Fordow site in Iran. Also, Iran might agree to talks sooner if it knows that the U.S. can keep attacking even after Israel runs low on weapons.

But if Mr. Trump joins the fight, it would be a big risk. He was elected to keep the U.S. out of Middle East wars. Even if he only plans to hit Iran’s nuclear sites, the U.S. could still get dragged into a bigger war. So far, Iran has mainly targeted Israel, but it might be saving missiles for attacks across the region. Iran may also have secret groups ready to strike in other countries. It could attack U.S. soldiers or civilians, raise oil prices by hitting Saudi oil sites, or block the Strait of Hormuz, an important route for oil and gas. It might even strike buildings in cities like Dubai or Qatar, causing foreign workers to flee and hurting their economies. If this happens, Mr. Trump would have no choice but to fight back.

So, what does this mean for America? Destroying Fordow, a key nuclear site, is important—but even that won’t fully stop Iran’s nuclear program. Iran might still have hidden sites, uranium, and the knowledge to build bombs. To stop Iran from going nuclear, the U.S. may need to keep fighting wars in the Middle East. But that would distract it from dealing with China, its main global rival. In the end, America may understand that talking to Iran is the least bad option. But Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu refusing to support talks makes this harder.

A Hard Choice for Trump

As The Economist notes, Mr. Trump faces a tough choice. If the United States joins Israel in attacking Iran, it could inflict greater damage and set back Tehran’s nuclear ambitions even further. This might pressure Iran’s leadership to come to the negotiating table—or in a more extreme scenario, even lead to regime change. However, none of these outcomes are guaranteed. At the same time, American involvement risks escalating the conflict into a much wider regional war. Given how fluid the situation remains, The Economist suggests it may be more prudent for Mr. Trump to wait—to observe how far Israel goes, whether Iran shows signs of genuine willingness to negotiate, and if U.S. intervention would make a real difference to the endgame.