Trump between compromise and escalation

08/06/2026

By Hicham Bou Nassif | Weinberg Associate Professor of International Relations and the Middle East and George R. Roberts Fellow at Claremont McKenna College-California

U.S. President Donald Trump spent years criticizing former President Barack Obama for signing the 2015 agreement with Iran, arguing that it was too lenient toward Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. That criticism now serves as a source of pressure on Trump as he continues the current round of engagement with Iran despite reports suggesting he has grown frustrated with the process. Whatever the outcome of the current confrontation, comparisons with what Obama previously achieved are inevitable. Trump needs to demonstrate that his results are superior to Obama’s, particularly since the current conflict with Iran has already cost the United States the lives of 13 soldiers and billions of dollars.

Indeed, as soon as reports emerged a few days ago about a possible deal with Iran, Republican senators quickly voiced their opposition, particularly Texas Senator Ted Cruz and South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham. Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal reminded Trump of his scathing criticism of Obama, whom he had accused of surrendering to Iran. The last thing Trump needs at the moment is a dispute with his Republican allies, making their position one of the many factors contributing to the complex political landscape surrounding him.

At the same time, Trump faces pressure from the opposite direction, represented by influential media personality Tucker Carlson, who holds significant sway over Trump’s electoral base. From the outset, Carlson strongly opposed the war, arguing that it had once again entangled the United States in a Middle Eastern conflict while driving up oil prices and inflation at home. Trump, after all, was elected on a platform of reducing U.S. involvement abroad and focusing on domestic issues. Despite the American economy’s vitality—often the envy of Europeans—millions of Americans continue to struggle with basic milestones such as purchasing a home or paying university tuition, even when they are employed. Meanwhile, US Congress itself has shown signs of unease over the war, with some lawmakers arguing that Trump exceeded his constitutional authority by initiating and continuing military operations without sufficient regard for the role of the legislative branch.

In short, Trump finds himself caught between pressures pushing him to continue the current round of confrontation with Iran, including a return to the use of force, with The Wall Street Journal serving as a daily voice for that faction of Republicans, and others pushing him in the opposite direction. This is one of the defining features of the current landscape.

The international dimension is no less complicated. From the beginning, the United States and Israel entered the conflict with different objectives. For Trump, the nuclear issue remains the top priority. For Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, however, the primary goal is changing the Mullah regime in Iran. This divergence in priorities reportedly formed the backdrop to a recent heated phone call between the two leaders, during which Trump was said to have used unusually vulgar language.

While Israeli officials continue to press for a tougher approach toward Iran, the Gulf states, fearful of retaliation from Tehran, have generally favored a negotiated solution. Europe’s cool response to the war has also been evident, with European diplomacy advocating an early ceasefire. Abroad, just as at home, Trump appears surrounded by those urging maximalist demands on one side and those advocating compromise on the other.

This article was originally published in Arabic by Nida al-Watana on 8 June 2026. The original can be found here.

The views expressed in this op-ed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of SyriacPress.