On Sunday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told CBS’ Face the Nation that the United States is "considering a full range of options" including military options against Iran, though he also was careful to note that President Donald Trump does not want to go to war.
Amid escalating tensions, experts largely agree that conflict between the two countries is not in anyone’s best interest.
The Cipher Brief tapped our own experts, Vice Admiral Kevin Donegan, USN (ret.), who served as Commander of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet and Commander of the 32 Nation Combined Maritime Forces in the Middle East, Norm Roule, former National Intelligence Manager for Iran at ODNI, and former CIA station chief Dan Hoffman for their perspective on the escalation of tensions and where they may lead.
The Threat of Miscalculation
Many experts agree that the risk of further escalation lies with miscalculations between the U.S. and Iran. And while Iran’s use of proxies is a potential trigger for further escalation, indicators of future Iranian decisions are closely tied to its current internal struggles.
Norm Roule, Former National Intelligence Manager for Iran, ODNI
"The initiative for conflict rests with Iran and its proxy tools. What will happen if a Houthi missile strikes a Saudi school? What if an Iraqi militia achieves a catastrophic attack on a U.S. or Western military convoy? What if one of Iran’s attacks on Gulf tankers results in an environmental catastrophe or significantly damages a tanker?"
Vice Admiral Kevin Donegan, USN, (ret.), Former Commander, U.S. 5th Fleet
"For Iran, their number one concern is regime survival. If that’s threatened, that’s when you would see Iran become much more aggressive. Right now, the collective impact from sanctions is layered on top of Iran’s own mismanagement of their economy and their extensive internal corruption. This has resulted in painful conditions inside Iran in terms of inflation, shortages of food and some medicines in places, a marked reduction in GDP and a reduction in the sale of their oil on the international market, but even with all this I don’t believe the regime is threatened. Also, for a lot of reasons, I do not believe regime change is in our interest either. However, I am most concerned about a miscalculation that results in a situation where one side becomes compelled to respond that could result in expanded conflict. An example could be an action by Iran or one of its proxies that causes significant U.S. casualties."
Dan Hoffman, Former CIA Chief of Station
"I think Iran feels as though it needs to portray the United States as the cause of all this to their own people. So, a little bit of confrontation in the Persian Gulf, in the Strait of Hormuz, has been a major flashpoint. I mean, a fifth of the world's oil is transported through there, and roughly a third of liquified natural gas. So, it's a strategically important flashpoint. The Iranians are going to try to use that to ratchet up the tension a little bit but do so because they feel like maybe it's going to help their standing with their own population. They're nervous about another green revolution, where people come out on the streets and protest that their currency, which has got no value to it, and the high cost of basic goods."
The Strategic Importance of a Coalition
While the U.S. broke with the JCPOA agreement in May of 2018, Europe and Iran have largely continued to abide by the agreement, but recent statements by Iran indicate that will change. Experts believe more of an alignment between the U.S. and Europe, which have not seen eye to eye on JCPOA, is necessary.
Vice Admiral Kevin Donegan, USN (ret.), Former Commander, U.S. 5th Fleet
"The best thing that the U.S. can get out of this current situation is a united coalition and the common denominator should be the free flow of commerce. In other words, bring the international community in alignment for Iran to stop blowing things up on the water because they see not just the U.S. but a united coalition that includes Europe and Asia and the GCC. In the past, sanctions were effective with Iran because it was a coalition and not just the U.S. that was lined up behind them. A united coalition is a clear indicator that if Iran keeps disrupting the flow of commerce, the outcome will be what they don’t want, instead of a fracturing of the GCC and getting to deal with Europe/EU instead of the U.S., it would be a coalescing of Nations against Iran’s actions."
Norm Roule, Former National Intelligence Manager for Iran, ODNI
"Europe is within its rights to protect the nuclear deal, but its unwillingness to speak about Iran’s role in Yemen says much about the limitations of European public diplomacy. Europe could also speak about the thousands of Europeans who live under the threat of Iranian-enabled Houthi missiles and how they see these attacks as a force protection issue."
What Happens Next?
Iran has ruled out negotiations for now, leaving little room for a political agreement that will de-escalate tensions. So, what does that mean for now?
Norm Roule, Former National Intelligence Manager for Iran, ODNI
"Negotiations remain unlikely in that engagement means concessions on issues of greatest concern to Iran’s hardliners. It will also become increasingly difficult for Iran to wait for a new and more sympathetic U.S. administration due to the likelihood that sanctions will lead to significant unrest. None of the actors involved in this issue are interested in a conventional conflict, so such a disaster would be inadvertent."
Vice Admiral Kevin Donegan, USN (ret.), Former Commander, U.S. 5th Fleet
"It is clear that the objective of the U.S. is to pressure Iran to the negotiating table, after all Iran has agreed to negotiations under less pressure in the past. That said, I have little hope that the negotiating table would have a positive outcome because if you were Iran, why would you negotiate with the current administration that is clearly not inclined to offer Iran a good deal and is up for election in a year? That doesn’t mean Iran won’t go to the table with the current U.S. administration, because it could allow both sides an opportunity to buy time and reduce the chance for a broader conflict that neither side wants."
Dan Hoffman, Former CIA Chief of Station
"The question for U.S. policymakers is, what's the tipping point? If the Iranians were to launch a major attack on us, or one of their proxies were to do that, that would certainly be regime suicide. Deploying the USS Abraham Lincoln and the B-52s and then the announcement through our own press that we have a plan for 120,000 troops to go to the Middle East, that was a deliberate demonstration to the Iranians that we're serious, but the question is, how far will the Iranians go? I think they're getting increasingly desperate."
Check in with The Cipher Brief every day this week for more focused expert coverage of the escalation. Read also A Strategy for Constraining Iran: A Conversation with Norm Roule and Restoring Deterrence with Iran, from Cipher Brief expert and former Senior CIA Analyst Steven Ward.
Have a view to express? Click POV below and get in on the conversation.
Join us March 22-24, 2020 for in-person briefings with Norm and other Cipher Brief experts by requesting your seat at The Cipher Brief’s 2020 Threat Conference, March 22-24 in Sea Island, GA.
Read more from Cipher Brief experts like Norm Roule, Admiral Kevin Donegan (Ret.) and Dan Hoffman in The Cipher Brief.
