Trump attacking Iran in final days of presidency a ‘worrying’ possibility, warn former military chiefs

The build-up of US warships near Iranian waters is raising fears Trump wants to order an attack before Biden’s inauguration. But would the president get his way? Kim Sengupta reports

(Photo by SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)

A build-up of US forces in the Gulf, with Israeli military support, amid growing tension, has raised the threat that Donald Trump may order a strike on Iran in the final days of his presidency, senior former military commanders have warned.   

The departing President, it has emerged, overturned acting Defence Secretary Christopher Miller’s directive to withdraw the USS Nimitz out of the region - a move seen as an effort de-escalate a potential confrontation with Tehran. The reversing of course means the aircraft carrier is now leading a sizeable US presence in the waters off Iran, which also includes the nuclear submarine USS Georgia.   

The US has flown B 52 bombers over the Gulf in a show of force. The Nimitz, one of the largest carriers in the world, with around 90 aircraft on board, is leading a strike force. The massive USS Georgia, only one of four in the US Navy converted to carry 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles, and one which normally carries Seal Commandos for clandestine operations, entered the Gulf towards the end of last month.  

On the same day an Israeli Dolphin class attack submarine, in an extremely rare move, crossed the Suez Canal into the Red Sea heading, it was claimed, for waters near Iran or possibly even into the Gulf. The scope of such operations by Israelis have been eased with normalisation of diplomatic relations with the UAE and Bahrain, but any attempt to transit the Strait of Hormuz is likely to lead to an encounter with Iranian forces.  

Major General Jonathan Shaw, a former head of the SAS, Assistant Chief of Defence Staff, and British commander in Iraq, maintained that with the focus on Trump’s attempts to overturn the US election results, there has been a lack of attention on a foreign conflict he may engineer.  Gen Shaw told The Independent: “the possibility that Trump might launch an attack on Iran receives less attention; yet there are worrying indicators we should also take this threat seriously. The first concerning sign is that the incoming Biden defence team have had their briefings by the Pentagon curtailed.  

“Denying access to the incoming team breaks all the rules of party politics and good governance and threatens a dangerous discontinuity in defence over the handover period. But if you are planning on action that you know your successor would not approve of, then isn’t this exactly what you do?”   

Gen Shaw continued: “If a concerted attack on Iranian facilities were ordered, the tools are there to do the job.  B-52 bombers, with supporting tankers and fighter escorts; the USS Nimitz carrier strike force. The USS Georgia transited the Straits of Hormuz into the Gulf, thus increasing both its potency and its vulnerability in the shallows, and the Israelis sending a Dolphin class attack submarine through the Suez Canal to join the US forces, albeit not in the Gulf itself. All Trump has to do is say the word.”  

General Sir Richard Barrons, the former chief of Joint Forces Command, who had served in Northern Ireland, Iraq and Afghanistan, agreed that Trump may want to carry out a strike against Iran and pointed out that there were those in the US military who would want to see Iranian power kept in check by force.  

In a few weeks, it is [Trump] who will be gone, and we will still be here

Senior Iranian official

“The US military is divided to an extent on this, there is a section which is quite hawkish about Iran see it as a threat, they are almost quasi-messianic in their attitude in this”, Gen Barrons told The Independent. “But at the same time, these people would not want to see a conflict which could easily get out of control in the region.  

“Trump may order an attack, but he may have problems with it being carried out. In order to justify an operation under national and international law there needs to be a direct threat, or intelligence to show a threat was imminent. The response needs to be necessary, discriminate and proportionate. The military commander needs to decide that these conditions are met. Can Trump still try it? You never know with Trump.”  

A South Korean destroyer has now arrived in waters near the Straits of Hormuz to add to the growing number of naval vessels after Iranian Revolutionary Guards seized a South Korean tanker, the Hankuk Chemi, and its 20 crew for “polluting the Persian Gulf with chemicals”.

Seoul said that it was hoping for a diplomatic solution to the situation and the destroyer Choi Young, carrying service personnel from the Cheonghae anti-piracy unit, will not be used for any rescue attempts. But security officials point out the danger of the “law of unintended consequences” with the build up forces in a volatile environment. The South Korean foreign minister, Kang Kyung-wha, refused to comment on reports that Tehran had seized the vessel to pressure Seoul into releasing $7 billion of Iranian assets frozen in South Korea as part of the Trump administration’s sanctions against Iran.  

On Monday, the Iranian government announced that it has restarted enriching uranium to 20 percent levels seen before an international agreement froze its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. The move came with the pointed message that it can be rescinded if the Biden administration returned to the nuclear deal that Trump has pulled the US out of.  Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said in a tweet the Tehran "resumed 20% enrichment, as legislated by our Parliament. IAEA has been duly notified," and added that, "Our measures are fully reversible upon FULL compliance by ALL."

Zarif had claimed at the weekend “Israeli agent-provocateurs are plotting attacks against Americans [to put] Trump in a bind with a fake casus belli. Be careful of a trap, any fireworks will backfire badly, particularly against your same BFFs.”  There have been persistent reports that Israel and Saudi Arabia has been lobbying Trump to carry out strikes on Iranian nuclear capabilities before he left office.   

Trump sought military options to attack Iran’s nuclear sites last November in the run-up to the US Presidential election. He was dissuaded from ordering an attack, reportedly, by Vice-President Mike Pence; Secretary of State Mike Pompeo; Christopher Miller and General Mark Milley, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  US officials warned that Iran may seek to avenge the killing of General Qassem Soleimani, the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, who was assassinated on Trump’s orders in a US missile strike on the anniversary of his death, 3rd January. But the date has passed without any attacks.  Senior US officers have tried to downplay the prospect of a conflict with Iran as Trump has continued to issue threats.   

Following the deployment of the USS Georgia, General Kenneth “Frank” McKenzie, the head of US Central Command, said: "I do believe we remain in a period of heightened risk, [but] I would just emphasise this key point: We're not looking to escalate ourselves. We're not looking for war with Iran, I really want to emphasise that." The General added that although he views Iran and its proxy Shia militias as the greatest threat to US interests in the region: "It is my belief that Iran doesn't want a war with the United States right now."  

Trump may order an attack, but he may have problems with it being carried out

General Sir Richard Barrons, former chief of Joint Forces Command

Robert Emerson, a British security analyst, commented, “It’s getting to be a matter of counting out the days to the inauguration. More frustrated Trump feels about the election, more perhaps the chance of lashing out abroad. Enriching uranium [to 20 per cent] is a diplomatic gambit by the Iranians, but it is the kind of thing people who want the US to strike may latch on to and portray as Iran one step nearer the bomb. The capture of the Korean tanker is another gambit, on the frozen money, but it has happened at a very edgy time. We need to hope that the wiser counsel prevails with Trump.”  

In Tehran, General Hossein Salami, who succeeded Soleimani as the head of the Revolutionary Guards, declared there would be a “strong response” to “ any action the enemy takes.” On a visit to a military base in Abu Musa Island, in the Gulf, he said: “We are here today to evaluate and be assured of our powerful capabilities at sea and against enemies who sometimes boast and threaten. We would respond with a reciprocal, decisive and strong blow to whatever action the enemy would take against us.”  

A senior Iranian official told The Independent: “We know that provocations are being planned, some have taken place, but we are being very careful about our actions as we have been since the martyrdom of Commander Soleimani from the earliest days. We keep on hearing that Trump will carry out an attack, we need to wait and see. But in a few weeks, it is he who will be gone, and we will still be here.”