Trump Faces Limited Set Of Military Options On Iran

The Trump administration has insisted it has numerous military options to deploy against Iran if the regime uses force against demonstrators.

But that menu is far more limited than it was even a year ago.

The U.S. troops and ships that were once at the president’s disposal have shifted to the Caribbean. A major American defense system sent to the Middle East last year has returned to South Korea. And administration officials say there are no plans for the movement of major assets.

The president can still order airstrikes that target Iranian leadership or military installations. But his choices are even more reduced than June, when the U.S. took out Iran’s nuclear sites. And he also must contend with lawmakers who, just over a week after Trump ordered the capture of Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro, are questioning whether a strike would draw the U.S. into another war in the region.

“What's the objective? How does military force get you to that objective?” asked Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee. “They're certainly repressing their people, but the president has yet to make the case that a military strike will either aid the population or get the government to change dramatically.”

The Trump administration also has been eating away at dwindling U.S. weapons stockpiles with the fast pace of military operations in the Red Sea, Iran and Venezuela.

The bottleneck has become particularly stark for air defense that protects U.S. forces within range of Iran’s weapons. If the administration strikes and Iranians retaliate forcefully, the U.S. may have a limited stockpile of interceptors to defend American forces against Tehran’s formidable rocket and missile arsenal. The Pentagon stations 10,000 U.S. troops at Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar and smaller groupings in Iraq, Syria and Jordan.

“If it does become a longer-term volley of strikes, then your interceptor capacity becomes all the more important,” said a former defense official who, like others interviewed, was granted anonymity to discuss national security matters. “We could get in a sticky situation very quickly on that front.”

The White House insisted the president had plenty of choices. "President Trump has a full menu of options at his disposal with regard to Iran," said spokesperson Anna Kelly.

Senior officials met Tuesday to talk about the U.S. response, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters, but Trump did not attend the meeting.

Iranian protests against staggering inflation and government policies began in December and have spread across the country. The regime’s security forces have cracked down against demonstrators, killing as many as 2,000 people, according to rights groups.

As Tehran’s response has escalated, so has Trump’s. In a Truth Social post Tuesday, Trump said that Iran’s “killers and abusers” within the regime “will pay a big price.”

“I have cancelled all meetings with Iranian Officials until the senseless killing of protesters STOPS,” Trump said. “HELP IS ON ITS WAY.”

But an administration official told POLITICO on Monday that no major moves of U.S. troops or assets were in the works. The USS Ford, which was rerouted from the Middle East last year, remains in the Caribbean in the aftermath of the Venezuela operation. The USS Vinson and USS Nimitz, the two U.S. aircraft carriers that Trump ordered to the Middle East in June, departed the region long ago.

The Patriot missile defense system sent from South Korea last year to the Middle East returned home in November, Gen. Xavier Brunson said on the sidelines of the Honolulu Defense Forum this week. “They're on the peninsula right now,” he said.

The Pentagon stressed its support for any decision the president makes.

“The Department of War stands ready to execute the orders of the commander-in-chief at any time and in any place,” Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson said in a statement.

The U.S. could quickly bring assets into and out of the region instead of massing troops, ships and aircraft — as it did in June when Trump ordered American bombers to fly across the Atlantic and strike Iran’s nuclear facilities. Officials have said offensive cyberattacksare also a possibility if diplomacy fails.

“I don't think you should expect to see nor do we really need to see a big build-up in military capability in the Gulf region,” said John Miller, a retired three-star admiral who last served as the commander of the Navy’s forces in the Middle East. “What we would see is something that either comes from some of our bases in the Gulf or something that's a global strike mission that comes from the United States.”

Miller said he expected the administration, if it chose to use airstrikes, would focus on “centers of gravity for the regime” including command bunkers, military sites and key communications nodes.

But even top Trump allies in Congress appeared reluctant to commit to a military operation in Iran that included U.S. troops.

“It's not for us to invade Iran, it’s to protect the Iranian people,” said Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.). “We're not going to commit boots on the ground.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said he preferred to see "non-kinetic solutions” such as further sanctions and economic pressure against Iran that could be coordinated with allies. And both Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Senate Armed Services Chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said they had not been briefed on possible strikes on Iran.

Such a move also threatens to invite another congressional admonishment.

Five Republicans sided with Democrats last week to advance legislation that would block the president from further use of U.S. armed forces in Venezuela. The vote proved one of the strongest rebukes yet to Trump.

“If you're going to aggressively go into another country militarily, you, under the Constitution, have to ask permission of Congress,” said Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who voted to limit Trump’s authority.