The ’12-Day War’ Between Israel and Iran: A Geopolitical Trump Show?

The recent clash between Israel and Iran, lasting merely 12 days, caused global concern over unforeseen consequences and brought the world to the brink of a regional conflict. However, the sudden attack and, more notably, the impressively ’round’ conclusion of the crisis—the so-called ‘Trump ceasefire’—combined with how it was politically capitalized on by Trump, raises legitimate questions: Was this truly a real conflict or perhaps a carefully staged geopolitical spectacle for Trump to claim victory? After the U.S. bombed three Iranian nuclear installations, branding the strikes as ‘spectacular,’ Trump wrote on Truth Social, ‘Congratulations world, it’s time for peace!’ declaring that the ’12-Day War’ ended in absolute success. He confidently added that the ceasefire would last forever. Despite frequent fragility of ceasefires in the Middle East, President Trump positioned himself as a peacemaker and formidable negotiator—just 48 hours after American stealth bombers hit targets in Iran. Through airstrikes on uranium enrichment facilities in Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan, Trump achieved an impressive military strike without U.S. casualties while quietly securing Israel’s tacit approval and promoting, via Qatar, an informal ceasefire with Iran. This closed the mouths of those accusing him of dragging the U.S. into a war unnecessary for Netanyahu. What did Trump gain? With his trademark style of sudden moves, Trump now appears as the leader who not only avoided another ‘endless conflict’ in the Middle East but also redefined American power through the ‘Make America Great Again’ doctrine. Moreover, the Republican leader seems to be winning—at least temporarily—domestically. Republicans pushing for a tough stance against Iran—but not new wars—see a leader who struck and then stopped. In essence, Trump’s projection as a peacemaker wasn’t based on diplomatic events but on communication exploitation of chaos. The rapid de-escalation, the almost symbolic nature of the strikes, the absence of massive losses, and Trump’s triumphant declaration of victory paint a scene reminiscent more of a well-rehearsed performance than spontaneous conflict. What lies ahead for Israel and Iran? Does Trump trust Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stop attacks on Iran? Did the U.S., as Trump claimed, ‘eliminate’ Iran’s nuclear program, the ‘existential threat’ to Israel? What will become of Israel and the war in Gaza, where civilian drama continues overshadowed by the latest conflict? Will Iran escape its theocratic regime and bring a political spring to the Middle East? Or are all these just another classic Trump fireworks show with a deeper crisis looming ahead? According to CNN, Trump appears victorious and virtually unscathed from the worst crisis in U.S.-Iran relations. He took a major risk many deemed dangerous: striking Iran’s nuclear sites without plunging the U.S. into another Iraq-like quagmire. So far, it seems he was justified. Although initially hesitant about Israel’s aggression, which seemed to trap him, Trump regained control and found an opportunity to deliver a serious blow to Tehran’s nuclear program at minimal cost to the U.S. His risky strategy ultimately paid off—he was lucky but decisive. Naturally, Trump didn’t miss the chance to celebrate the daring mission of the B-2 bombers from Missouri. If the crisis subsides, Trump could reap political benefits, at least within the Republican Party. Perhaps he has mended the rift with his MAGA base, which began worrying he violated his promise not to involve in new wars. The crisis revealed who forms Trump’s inner circle of trust, including General Dan Kern, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff. Conversely, the future of National Intelligence Director Avril Haines and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin seems uncertain. Trump appears determined to test a diplomatic solution with Iran. Yet, he also demonstrated willingness to use overwhelming military force, debunking the image of ‘TACO diplomacy’ (Trump Always Chickens Out). Despite celebrations, Trump’s handling raised serious questions. He engaged in military operations without informing the American public and politicized the mission, excluding Democrats from decision-making. He ignored Congress, confirming his disregard for institutions and his role as president of all Americans. He also disregarded U.S. allies and mocked their peace efforts, signaling a new era where the U.S. operates independently of alliances, focusing solely on its interests, writes CNN. The critical question remains unanswered: What about Iran’s nuclear program? In his late Saturday announcement, Trump stated the attack aimed to ‘destroy every nuclear enrichment capability of Iran.’ Initial estimates indicate severe damage to Iranian installations, but it’s too early for Trump to celebrate. Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told CNN that Iran had already ‘protected’ 400 kg of enriched uranium at 60%—just below the 90% needed for a nuclear bomb. Meanwhile, Trump hopes the attacks will bring Tehran back to the negotiating table for a new agreement. However, many believe the message received by Iranian leadership is the opposite: to resort to the only survival method—a nuclear bomb capable of deterring all future threats. From a non-proliferation perspective, Trump’s decision was an imprudent escalation likely bringing Iran closer to acquiring nuclear weapons, comments Kelsey Davenport of the Arms Control Association. Iran may have had time to move uranium to hidden locations, considered probable. Expert Joseph Cirincione told CNN it’s impossible to ‘bomb away’ knowledge or Iran’s stockpile. He warned that with current materials, Tehran could build its first bomb in five days and ten total in three weeks. ‘This is what worries me most. Could Iran rush to complete construction before the uranium is detected or destroyed by the U.S. or Israel?’ If these scenarios come true, Trump’s ‘triumph’ might prove a tragic folly—and possibly the beginning of something even more dangerous.