US President Trump deploys naval force and threats against Iran, mirroring Venezuela playbook, but experts warn of greater complexity and unpredictable consequences.
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump is applying tactics used against Venezuela to Iran, deploying a naval force and issuing warnings to its leadership.
This shift follows the tactical success of the operation that toppled Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro.
Trump stated on social media that the US fleet near Iran is larger than the one sent to Venezuela.
He wrote that it is “ready, willing, and able to rapidly fulfill its mission, with speed and violence, if necessary.”
However, experts highlight sharp and significant differences between the two scenarios.
Iran presents far more complexities than Venezuela, according to analysts.
Mona Yacoubian of the Center for Strategic and International Studies said Iran is “inordinately more complex,” with more diffuse centers of power.
She warned that a ‘decapitation strike’ could provoke difficult-to-anticipate effects and “unleashing a mess inside of Iran.”
The nature of Iran’s government presents a key challenge.
While both regimes espouse resistance to the US, Tehran’s clerical leadership shows fewer signs of internal cracks.
The state relies on the elite Revolutionary Guards, who recently put down mass protests ruthlessly.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio told a Senate committee the Islamic republic was “weaker than it has ever been.”
He added there was no “simple answer” on what would follow Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei if he falls.
Military and geographical factors also differ sharply.
US forces rapidly executed an operation in Caracas, which is in the same hemisphere.
Tehran is much farther inland and has weathered previous major attacks.
Iran’s leaders have been weakened by the largest protests since the 1979 revolution.
Some protesters and exiled leaders have urged Trump to strike to help bring down the government.
Skeptics argue it could rally supporters to the government’s side or that it is too late.
Trump’s stated goal appears more constrained than regime change.
He has urged Iran to accept tough constraints on its nuclear program and missiles to end the standoff.
Observers say Iranian leaders may prefer negotiating over weapons rather than facing an existential threat.
Kirsten Fontenrose of the Atlantic Council wrote that for Iran, the Maduro operation is “strategically relevant less as a template than as a signal.”
She noted it complicates Iran’s assumption that the US fears escalation too much to target leaders.
Regional dynamics also differ, with Trump enjoying close ties to Gulf Arab monarchies.
These oil-rich US allies have warned against intervention, fearing a spiraling regional conflict.
They worry such conflict would jeopardize their image as stable havens for business.
