Did Trump make the right call?


With the US now hitting Iran directly for the first time, we’re all left with two big questions.

  • First, was this the right call?

Backers argue the ayatollah runs a fascist, expansionist regime openly calling for Israel’s destruction and sponsoring like-minded terrorist groups, all while stringing a naïve world along with talks, yet still stockpiling uranium enriched to 60% (way beyond the 3-5% you need for civilian use). So the US president has now hit Iran’s nuclear program, avoided any US boots on the ground, and restored US deterrence in the process. What’s not to like?

Ah, well critics argue he’s violated laws, ignored sanguine US intelligence, revealed a double standard on Israel’s own nuclear program, and breached his own pledge to avoid wars, yet might’ve now a) vindicated if not accelerated whatever’s left of Iran’s nuclear program, b) incentivised more attacks on US interests, and c) undermined US credibility — why do a deal if a later US president might withdraw then bomb you?

But you know what? History’s answer to all this might ultimately depend on…

  • Second, what happens next?

US messaging has effectively been ‘no backsies‘ — ie, we’re done here, unless you try us.

But Iran is sending mixed signals across its military, nuclear, and economic fronts:

In terms of any military response, regime officials are telling Western outlets they’ll limit any retaliation to further (dwindling) strikes on Israel, but there are also claims Iran might

  • Activate sleeper cells abroad (though that might just vindicate these US strikes)
  • Activate Iranian proxies in the Middle East (though they’re now so weak), and/or
  • Pull a repeat of Tehran’s response to Trump’s 2020 hit on General Soleimani (ie, telegraph a symbolic response to avoid any actual US harm or escalation).

Then on Iran’s nuclear program, Tehran claims this is barely a flesh wound, arguing a) it already relocated nuclear material (initial intel agrees), and b) it’s already rebuilding “with even greater strength“. I.e., you can flatten buildings, collapse bunkers, and even shatter centrifuges, but that’s not the same as reversing a long-term determination to go nuclear.

And finally on the economic front, Iran’s parliament is floating the idea of blocking the Strait of Hormuz, but that’s really up to Iran’s leader. And he’ll note that, while threatening ~5% of America’s oil supply, this would really screw both a) Iran’s friends (China gets 45% of its oil via Hormuz), and b) its neighbours: the Emiratis export 60% of their oil via Hormuz, while it’s 88% for the Saudis, and pretty much 100% for the Iraqis, Qataris, and Kuwaitis.

So… what’s Iran gonna do?

One driver is the fact that Israel’s assassinations have seemingly targeted Iran’s hardliners, potentially nudging Tehran’s remaining balance away from more escalation.

But yet another indicator is the oil price, which has remained surprisingly stable given everything we’ve just outlined above: that’s a bet we’re not on the brink. At least, not yet.

Intrigue’s Take

So, how’s the rest of the world viewing this? While a couple of US allies have now openly backed these strikes, most are staying out of it (aka issuing vague calls for de-escalation).

As for US rivals? They’ve been remarkably unified, with Beijing, Moscow, Pyongyang, Havana, and Caracas all issuing spicy condemnations. Why? Marxist-Leninists, Putinists, Juchists, Communists, and Chavistas have little in common, but one thing they share with Iran’s theocrats is an ideological opposition to the US, or at least to US interventionism.

And there may be no more potent demonstration of continued American reach than this weekend’s display that a US president can still hit any target, at any time, and with tech mostly developed back when MacGyver was still on TV.

Sound even smarter:

  • Our exclusive WhatsApp group has included some interesting discussions on the legal debates around these US strikes. It’s free to join the conversation by referring five frolleagues to Intrigue using your unique referral link down below!
Latest Author Articles
The geopolitics of citizenship

The president of Kosovo just announced via Insta that she’s granted citizenship to UK-based popstar Dua Lipa, so you know what that means, dear Intriguer. Yes, we’re going to need a quick look at the geopolitics of citizenship, with three examples, starting in… i. 🇽🇰 Kosovo Why’d President Osmani do this? Sure, Dua Lipa was born to Kosovan-Albanian parents, and lived there […]

4 August, 2025
The environmental ruling that could change everything

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague just weighed in on climate change, and it’s worth your attention whether you’re in the board room or the cabinet room. Or any other room, really. The case gives off major David vs Goliath vibes because it’s been led by tiny Pacific Island nations like Vanuatu, […]

24 July, 2025
China’s waging war on price wars

We’ve talked about hot wars, cold wars, and trade wars. But now it’s time to talk about another type of war: price wars. For the past year, Communist Party figures have referred periodically to China’s concept of neijuan: that Mandarin word’s characters translate literally as “rolling” and “inside“. It’s like spinning your wheels — lots […]

14 July, 2025
Labubu, geopolitics and culture

It’s time to take a quick break from all the trade wars and actual wars, and go back in time to pitch you a few quirky business ideas. But they all lean into culture, so bring your thick-rimmed glasses, turtle-neck, and beret, okay? As for the first pitch, we’re taking you to… Hear us out. […]

30 June, 2025