⚡Inside the political risks — and potential rewards — of “Operation Epic Fury”
The strike is extremely politically risky — but there’s also opportunity here for the GOP if the mission is a success.
Today’s newsletter is adapted from a column I wrote for congressional media outlet, The Washington Reporter, which posted last night. Read it here.
THE POLITICAL FALLOUT OF WAR – President DONALD TRUMP ran on ending American foreign “adventurism” and ushering in a new era of world peace. Now, he’s pulled the country into war with Iran.
With the midterms around the corner — and Americans wary of U.S. entanglement in another Middle East conflict — “Operation Epic Fury” is probably the riskiest move Trump has made since retaking office.
Sure, he’s bragging that AYATOLLAH KHOMEINI is dead — along with dozens of top Islamic Republic leaders. But as of Monday morning, so, too, are at least four U.S. soldiers. And this is only the beginning.
Meanwhile, questions are swirling, as uncertainty dominates the American voter’s psyche and the world. How long will this campaign last? Will the president order boots on the ground? What does the endgame look like?
THIS MORNING, WE’RE STARTING TO GET some answers to these questions, with Secretary of War PETE HEGSETH briefing reporters on mission goals. They include: 1) Destroying Iran’s missiles and missile production, 2) Destroying the Persian nation’s Navy, and 3) Ensuring Iran will never attain nuclear weapon.
Not on the to-do list, per Hegseth? Regime change, even as the U.S. and Israel decimate the Islamic Republic’s leadership ranks as part of the mission.
“This is not Iraq. This is not endless,” Hegseth told reporters, arguing that the country shouldn’t expect to be sucked into nation-building and urging the Iranian people to rise up and take charge. “We set the terms of this war from start to finish. Our ambitions are not utopian.”
DESPITE THE RISKS, the reward could be huge if Trump pulls this off. It’s a big “if” — but if this president manages to end nearly 50 years of Islamic Republic brutality and push Iran into a new dawn — all without pulling the U.S. into an extended, months-long engagement — even Democrats would be hard-pressed to deny it’s a new chapter worth celebrating.
“This will be like ending the Soviet Union, the Berlin Wall. This is a transformational moment for humankind, for security,” Iranian-American Moj Mahdara told CNN’s Dana Bash on Sunday morning. Mahdara, a Democrat, even went on to lecture her own party, arguing that, “it is imperative the Democrat Party wake up and get past their dislike of President Trump,” while recognizing the importance of the moment.
RECENT POLLING ENCAPSULATES the political dangers — but also the opportunity for the GOP. In a study conducted days ago, with talks of a strike looming, only 21 percent of voters backed the U.S. bombing Iran. A majority of Republicans even opposed such actions, with only 40 percent in favor.
But the same study shows large chunks of voters — 30 percent overall — aren’t sure what to think. That’s a chance for the party to shape the narrative and possibly even flip the script, as difficult as that may be.
We saw similar large chunks of undecided numbers when the president snatched NICOLÁS MADURO from Venezuela — even as media breathlessly fixated on the public’s overall opposition to the operation. And sure enough, after the administration kept the campaign narrow and limited — with no U.S. boots on the ground and no American deaths — approval increased over time, particularly among Republicans.
A MESSAGE FROM OUR SPONSOR
Affordable Health Care Initiative
America’s health insurance providers are stepping up — negotiating with hospitals and drug companies to fight rising costs.
THE SITUATION IN IRAN IS FAR MORE COMPLICATED, of course — even as the president told Fox News’ BRET BAIER Venezuela is the “template.” Unlike with Venezuela, there are serious questions about what comes next — questions it doesn’t appear even the U.S. government can answer at this time. Some regional experts are warning that a power vacuum at the top could foster a terrorism breeding ground — or even allow a more extreme leader to emerge, putting the world right back where we started.
There’s also the ramifications on the economy, with oil prices jumping more than 10 percent Sunday night — a potential political hit that comes as Trump has boasted about lower prices at the pump. Iran has retaliated by targeting oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, where 20 percent of the world’s oil passes through. And should the trend continue, higher prices will almost certainly factor into the midterms.
That’s to say nothing about the tragic loss of American life, a game-changer on its own that hits home for many voters. Suddenly, the sacrifice of our nation is about to have a face and a name. And many will question whether going to war with Iran — however brief — was worth it.
THE CHALLENGE FOR REPUBLICANS is that the party hasn’t made the case for war to the public, even as they may think the rationale is obvious. Over the weekend, even many Republicans were telling me privately that the White House has fallen down on messaging the need for action, the endgame and strategy — though that’s starting to change. Some have told me they wish Trump would have spent more time on Iran during his State of the Union, when more than 30 million Americans turned in.
Democrats, meanwhile, are hammering home what they decry as Trump’s broken campaign promise to end war. Amplified by MAGA voices like TUCKER CARLSON, who feel betrayed and are calling the operation “absolutely disgusting and evil,” they’re accusing the president of a mess of his own making.
“Barack Obama reached a deal that prevented Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Trump ripped up that deal. Now we are at war with Iran to prevent it from getting a nuclear weapon,” wrote longtime Dem strategist Dan Pfeiffer on X. (The missive had five million engagements.)
There are also complications with the message itself. Back in June, when the U.S. first struck Iran, the administration claimed the weapons program was obliterated and attacked reporters citing an internal assessment suggesting it was not. Now they argue the nuclear threat was enough to act, a circle Republicans will have to square in TV hits this week.
There are also shifting arguments on the “why now” question. The administration over the weekend argued in a briefing with reporters that Iran was preparing a preeminent strike on the U.S. But CNN has reported that that’s not the case, prompting some Democrats (and members of the media) to accuse the administration of breaking international law.
SPEAKING OF THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE… Democrats aren’t exactly unified in their response, a sign that they’re also unsure how the political chips will fall. Sen. JON OSSOFF (Ga.) — the lone Senate Democrat facing re-election in a Trump state — has blasted Trump for attacking, suggesting even vulnerable Dems think Iran politics are ugly for the president.
But others who know foreign policy well, like Sen. CHRIS COONS (D-Dele.) — no Trump-lover himself — have been more nuanced.
“The Iranian regime has been the greatest exporter of terror in the region, and I will not grieve for one moment the passing of the supreme leader of Iran,” Coons said on the same CNN program this morning, even as he has argued that “this is not how a democracy goes to war.”
Democrats — who are expected this week to force War Powers votes reining in the president — will have to be sensitive of the potential optics of looking unpatriotic, even as they’re gearing up to take advantage of the political hit the president could take should the situation in Iran go sidewise. Democratic members tell me its a careful balance, yes, but one they’re confident they can strike.
What probably won’t work with the public? Complaints about mundane process fouls, as correct as they may be. Democrats have blasted Trump for bypassing Congress’ Article congressional authority to declare war — thought its hard for me to see this doing much but making Average Joe’s eyes glaze over.
The more salient questions: Whether more Americans die and the U.S. homeland suddenly becomes a target for future terror plots, endangering everyone. If the answer is yes to those questions, expect more voters to side with the Dems and the Tucker Carlsons of the world.
Thanks for your great insights; a clear-eyed analysis of the Iranian strike