options

WASHINGTON — With three months remaining until election day, there is now little the Trump administration can do to bring relief to Americans battered by years of stagnant wages and steep inflation before they hit the polls, experts say — complicating midterm campaigning for Republicans and sharpening the opportunity for Democrats to win back some control in Washington.

That’s in part because the Trump administration has very few levers to turn the tide in such a short period, and has shown little interest in using those it does have, experts said. Rather, President Trump has persisted in waging war in Iran and pushed forward with new tariffs on trade partners despite both contributing to soaring costs for food, gas and other basic necessities.

Other options, such as issuing rebate checks for consumers or releasing strategic oil reserves, would be costly in the long run, experts said.

“There isn’t much available on a 14-week clock that doesn’t cost more later than it delivers now,” said Patrick Harker, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School and former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

The Federal Reserve on Wednesday also declined to use its primary tool for reducing inflation — increasing interest rates — by instead holding rates steady. Trump had not supported a rate increase, instead pressuring the central bank to lower rates, which can lower borrowing costs but increase inflation.

Some factors driving up costs are virtually impossible to resolve in the near term, such as damage to oil refining capabilities in the Middle East as a result of the war in Iran. Others are already baked into pricing to come as a result of tariffs and fuel costs, including for groceries, experts said.

Incumbent parties often suffer midterm losses when voters are broadly pessimistic about the economy, as they are now despite remarkable resilience in the U.S. labor market and strong stock returns.

Consumer prices declined in June for the first time in six years, largely thanks to a decline in gas prices as the Iran war appeared headed toward a resolution — which is no longer the case.

New data Thursday showed the U.S. economy growing at a sluggish 1.5% pace from April through June. It also showed consumer spending and inflation slowing down. But slowing inflation has not meant lower costs.

As the Iran war entered its sixth month this week, average gas prices nationally climbed back above $4 a gallon. On Wednesday, the price of Brent crude oil rose to $90 a barrel as the U.S. and Iran carried out new strikes.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment. However, Trump asserted Wednesday that the economy is strong — citing in part new U.S. automobile plants as evidence — while slamming the Federal Reserve’s decision to leave interest rates unchanged.

“They want to keep rates up, but we will fight through this,” Trump told reporters at an Oval Office event. “We have things that are going on in our country in the likes of which no one has ever seen.”

As Democrats have seized on the economy as the midterms’ defining issue, Trump has promised improvements but also called affordability concerns a “hoax.” Last week, he rejected the notion that he should rethink his unpopular Iran strategy because of the looming midterms.

“No, the election — I can’t think about that having to do with this,” he said before renewing attacks last week. “I think people are very impressed.”

Jonathan Nagler, a New York University professor who studies how the economy shapes politics, said it is impossible to predict how voters will feel about the economy three months from now, because there are so many variables.

But data make clear that “the better the economy is, the better the incumbent does,” and voters will blame Trump and his party for their economic woes if they persist, Nagler said — particularly with gas prices, which are “a non-trivial expense” that is “super directly tied to Trump.”

“Democrats can draw a very straight line from a decision by Trump to go to war with Iran, and gas prices rising. That is just very, very easy to explain to people in a pretty convincing way,” Nagler said. “Democrats can try to say, ‘Hey, there should be some accountability here.’”

Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG, said inflation has compounded for years “to make the level of prices too high for too many,” and is clearly the biggest economic issue facing many Americans.

“And that’s not likely to change in the next few months, where you still not only have some of the spillover effects of the war in Iran to play out — most notably in terms of the fall harvest and food prices, which will go well into 2027 — but also just the on-again, off-again truces and the damages to refining capacities,” she said.

All of that is adding to “simmering” service sector inflation and Trump’s latest tariffs, which mean “more paperwork, more costs, and another bump in prices in the pipeline,” Swonk said.

Harker said the administration has no good options for bringing down prices by November. Reducing tariffs takes time to filter down to shelf prices, so that can’t offer a quick fix even if Trump were to decide to cut them, he said.

The biggest variable between now and November is energy, Harker said, and no economic tool allows the administration to control what happens in the Persian Gulf. Even if Trump’s war with Iran were to end, economists say it would take a significant amount of time for gas prices to come down.

The Fed could decide to raise rates in September, but Harker said that would take time to filter through the economy and would do “nothing” ahead of November.

On the campaign trail, Trump promised to immediately “reverse the disastrous effects of [President] Biden’s inflation and rebuild the greatest economy in the history of the world,” one where “incomes will skyrocket, inflation will vanish completely, jobs will come roaring back, and the middle class will prosper like never, ever before.”

A recent CNN poll found that 65% of Americans believe Trump’s policies have worsened economic conditions in the country, while less than a quarter — 22% — said they had improved conditions, and that 67% believe Trump’s choices in Iran hurt the U.S.

The poll found Trump had a 34% approval rating, matching a career low from the end of his first term, and that his support fell even lower on key issues: to 28% on Iran, 25% on inflation and 21% on gas prices.

A recent Pew Research Center survey found most Americans aren’t feeling great about the economy — with 24% rating economic conditions as excellent or good, 41% rating them as “only fair,” and 35% rating them as poor. It also found that voters want candidates running for Congress in November to talk about economic issues.

Democrats see the poll numbers as an opportunity to win over swing voters, which becomes more urgent as the campaign enters its fall stretch.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) last week placed blame for rising costs squarely on Trump‘s tariffs, his “reckless war of choice” in Iran, and cuts to healthcare made in last year’s federal spending package.

Vidhya Jeyadev, a spokesperson for Majority Democrats, which is focused on growing the party, said Democrats now have an opportunity to bring in Republican voters disillusioned with the president’s handling of the economy.

“We need to tie what people are feeling day to day — rising rent, groceries, utility costs — directly to the choices that Trump and Republicans have made,” Jeyadev said.

Many Republican leaders have acknowledged economic challenges while defending Trump’s policy decisions.

They have broadly backed the war in Iran as a necessary step to halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) recently defended Trump’s tariffs, too, acknowledging some sectors have experienced “challenges” as a result, but saying “all that’s settling out as we go into this election cycle.”

Swonk said some economic indicators do show a surprisingly strong economy that benefits the rich.

However, “there’s a reason people are upset, and that’s because inflation, much like stock returns, has compounded — but not everybody has stock returns. Everybody feels inflation. And that drives a larger wedge between the haves and the have-nots,” she said.

“What anyone really cares about is the prices that went up didn’t come back down, and their wages didn’t keep up with it,” Swonk said. “It doesn’t feel like you can do as many things as you once did. And that’s hard.”

Last week, it was reported that US President Donald Trump placed massive attacks on Iran on hold after a meeting with advisers at the White House. Clearly, domestic political pressure on him and on the Republican Party over rising economic costs is fierce. Current polls suggest nearly 70 percent of Americans oppose the war.

Despite assertions, notably by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, that Iran’s military has reached “its lowest point ever”, Iran is still able to conduct massive drone and missile strikes. Some intelligence suggests Iran has reconstituted and increased its capacity to build these weapons.

Meanwhile, the US has moved more aircraft and missile defence units in preparation for what may be a campaign to target staging points for Iranian forces. Two Marine Expeditionary Units (MEUs) and components of the 82nd or 101st Airborne are currently stationed in the region.

Yet, reports that the US and its Gulf allies have exhausted defensive missile magazines, as well as Tomahawk land-attack missiles, may be a powerful constraint.

While Trump appears not to have made a decision yet, he has several options on how to move forward.

The first option is ramping up air and missile strikes. One of the challenges of this strategy is that the list of military targets may have been exhausted. If so, expanding the aerial campaign would mean attacking largely civilian infrastructure, including energy production facilities, electricity and power grids, bridges and roads, and television and phone networks. The likely outcomes are all bad.

Trump would be accused of war crimes. The Iranian public would coalesce in their resentment against the US. Iran’s ability to strike back would not be significantly curbed and it may strike Gulf desalination and energy infrastructure. The result would be a humanitarian catastrophe. No plans exist to deal with this contingency. And of course, oil could soar to $150 or even $200 a barrel, triggering an international economic disaster.

Another option is a ground invasion of some sort. The forces currently deployed in the region are too small to achieve any realistic military objectives. A MEU numbers about 2,500 marines and only 800 of them are infantry, able to conduct very limited ground operations. Airborne units deploy with only a few days worth of bullets, beans and batteries. Resupply is essential for these units.

As retired US Army General Barry McCaffery has pointed out, even 150,000 troops may not be enough to secure control of the Strait of Hormuz along the Iranian coast.

Attacking Kharg Island requires a long and dangerous transit from the western end of the Strait of Hormuz. That would create conditions for a high number of casualties among US troops.

The third option is for Trump to employ a nuclear weapon, at least as a demonstration shot. That would open a catastrophic Pandora’s box of consequences. Trump would be declared a war criminal. Wherever and however the weapon is detonated—an air or surface burst—it would have destructive outcomes.

If exploded exoatmospherically, the nuclear bomb would emit an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) which would destroy virtually all chip-installed systems for hundreds of miles beyond Iran. Few modern militaries, including in the Gulf, are protected from EMP due to costs. A surface burst would form a radioactive cloud that would travel east given the winds and affect populations well beyond Iran.

A major geopolitical consequence would be that such an attack could change the way Russia’s President Vladimir Putin sees the possibility of using nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine.

Given this list of unpalatable options, the most promising is to claim victory and pursue negotiations. Trump will say he has brought Iran to the negotiating table even though talks between Washington and Tehran have not stopped despite the escalation. The first issue would be reopening the Strait of Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb. Oil prices would drop. Stock markets would rebound.

Trump would take the credit. And a devastating war and economic crisis would be sensibly avoided. This is his best and only sensible option.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

July 18 (UPI) — New York City Mayor Zohran Mandani on Saturday said his government is reviewing whether it could legally arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over accusations of war crimes.

Netanyahu is expected to visit the city for the United Nations General Assembly in September.

In 2024, the International Criminal Court issued a warrant for the prime minister’s arrest over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, including starvation and attacking a civilian population.

“I believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu belongs in The Hague,” Mamdani told The New York Times. “He’s a war criminal who has been charged by the International Criminal Court, and what you will find is that is an opinion that is held by many, purely because of what his actions have wrought over these past many years.”

Mandani said his legal team is reviewing the city’s options.

“We’re not talking about a personal assessment of Benjamin Netanyahu,” the mayor told The Times. “We’re talking about the International Criminal Court and the fact that they have a warrant out for this prime minister’s arrest, and I think it’s important to talk about the weight that that has as a charge and that also, as the mayor of New York City, I’ll be following the laws of New York City.”

Netanyahu has denied the ICC charges and disputes the court’s jurisdiction.

In a previous interview, the prime minister claimed without evidence that Mandani is a Hamas supporter.

“He is with the terror actors,” he told WABC. “I think, secretly, he hates America.”

Michael Waltz, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., called Mandani’s comments “pure political theater.”

“The U.S. is not party to the Rome Statute that underlies the ICC,” he wrote on X, adding, “The U.N. Headquarters Agreement grants diplomatic protections to visiting heads of government.”

June 9 (UPI) — The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday added bemotrizinol to the list of permitted active ingredients in over-the-counter sunscreens, the first addition to that list since the 1990s.

The Department of Health and Human Services “is advancing innovation by bringing a new sunscreen ingredient to the U.S. market for the first time in 20 years,” HHS Secretary Robert F.Kennedy Jr said. “Bemotrizinol has been used safely in Europe for decades, and FDA’s action will increase competition and consumer confidence in sunscreen products.

The FDA said the ingredient has low levels of absorption through the skin and into the body and is generally recognized as safe and effective for adults and children 6 months old and older.

The American Chemical Society said that BEMT blocks ultraviolet A and ultraviolet B light rays and was first used in sunscreens in the European Union in 2000, with Canada, Australia and some countries in Asia following suit soon after.

UV B rays have more energy, cause visible sunburns and are the ones blocked by most U.S. sunscreens today. However, UV A rays can also cause skin cancers, the American Cancer Society said. They also cause skin cells to age and can cause indirect damage to cells’ DNA. The ACS said about 95% of the UV rays that reach the ground are UV A rays.

The FDA said an over-the-counter monograph drug, such as a sunscreen product, can enter the market without an approved drug application if it meets certain requirements. DSM Nutritional Products LLC submitted an OTC monograph order request to add BEMT, at concentrations up to 6%, as a new active ingredient in the OTC monograph for sunscreens. The FDA proposed to add BEMT in December, and the public could submit comments through Jan. 26.

Yariv Oppenheimer told Al Jazeera that Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has incentives to escalate tensions with Iran and Hezbollah but is constrained by US President Donald Trump and US interests. He said Iran’s June 7 response was a warning, not a push for war, and doubts Trump would allow major Israeli retaliation.

Tehran, Iran – Iran is facing more energy constraints as its summer season begins, with the widespread use of air conditioning and other needs during hotter months contributing to an imbalance between supply and consumption.

For decades, successive Iranian governments have kept utility bills well below supply costs for households and offices through a mix of implicit oil-and-gas subsidies, administered tariffs, state-controlled pricing, and sometimes direct financial support.

The negative impacts of the war with Israel and the United States on the economy mean the government has fewer tools at its disposal to deal with an energy crisis this summer.

Despite having the world’s third-largest proven crude oil reserves, Iran will have to import fuel again as demand outpaces refinery output.

President Masoud Pezeshkian has repeatedly urged households and offices to take practical steps to limit energy consumption. Last week, he removed his jacket during a government meeting to demonstrate how Iranians can avoid turning down their air conditioning thermostats in their offices.

Even though energy costs for households are much lower than in other parts of the world, corruption, mismanagement, sanctions, chronic inflation and currency devaluation have eroded the benefits Iranians usually feel from subsidised energy prices.

In November 2019, the government announced a tiered gasoline price scheme that would see huge increases for some consumers. This sparked nationwide protests, and since then, the government has been wary about similar price hikes.

While inflation has galloped on, continued subsidies have kept fuel artificially low.

The administration’s attempts to tackle the subsidies burden due to a mounting budget crunch have resulted in only limited increases in petrol through a complex three-tiered pricing system.

This is applied via a government-issued fuel card, giving most users of Iranian-made vehicles access to 60 litres (15.85 US gallons) per month of subsidised petrol at 15,000 rials (0.8 cents) and another 100 litres (26.42 gallons) at 1.6 cents.

Iranians going over this amount then must use an “emergency card” issued at petrol stations, permitting them to an additional 30 litres (7.9 gallons) of fuel a day at 50,000 rials (about 2.9 cents) per litre.

After a new cap was imposed during the war to limit fuel consumption, each card allows only 30 litres of fuel a day. Petrol stations are issued their own “emergency card” for uses beyond this limit.

Due to supply constraints, staff at petrol stations have now reportedly been instructed to limit the use of these cards to 10 to 15 litres (up to 4 gallons) or asked not to issue any new cards at all to customers.

The Iranian government is running similar schemes for natural gas, electricity and urban water, with fears of social unrest making them averse to any sudden price hikes.

There appears to be little the government can do to bridge the divide between lower energy production and growing demand for subsidised fuel, illustrated by the perpetual queues at petrol stations since the start of the war.

“Reforming and increasing the price of energy is currently not feasible and logical due to the current economic conditions and social concerns,” Esmail Saghab Esfahani, a vice president of the state-linked Organization for Energy Optimization and Strategic Management, said earlier this week.

There have been some changes to pricing structures, but this is impacting small businesses that are already struggling with the dire economic conditions in Iran.

One 35-year-old owner of a welding workshop near Tehran, who asked to remain anonymous, told Al Jazeera that a surge in his monthly energy bill from 40 million rials ($23) per month in the previous Persian calendar year to three times that today.

“I went to the electricity company, and they only kept saying the tariffs have gone up,” he said.

“I had a similar message from a friend who is paying much more now for roughly the same usage as before, so it looks like we’re to pay for the cost of war.”

Authorities say that any complaints about escalating bills will be reviewed. They also have a system where normal household energy consumption is kept artificially low, but excessive users can be billed as much as 45 times the normal prices.

Despite having the second-largest proven natural gas reserves in the world, Iran still suffers from perpetual supply shortages during its winter and summer, when consumption is at its highest.

The situation has worsened during the war, with strikes on Iranian energy facilities seeing Iran’s gasoline production capacity drop marginally from 115 million litres (30.37 million gallons) per day to 110 million litres (29.06 million gallons). Meanwhile, consumption has jumped from 10 million litres (2.64 million litres) in 2025 to 140 million litres this year (36.98 million litres).

US President Donald Trump’s threats of more strikes on power plants have heightened fears of further blackouts and gas shortages this summer, meaning the energy crisis is likely to continue in the coming months.

TAKE this as your sign to grab your faves and book a brilliant spa break.

From Champneys, Tring to The Greenway Hotel & Spa, Cheltenham and a Fab find in Faversham – we’ve got you covered for rest and recuperation.

THE FRIENDS’ GET-TOGETHER – Champneys, Tring

Editor in chief Sinead McIntyre and pals found R&R in Hertfordshire.

THE PAD

Set in 170 acres of beautiful countryside, this stately home, once owned by the Rothschild family, gives immediate Downton Abbey vibes, thanks to the sweeping staircases, huge chandeliers and grand fireplaces that are home to roaring fires on cooler days.

As do the rooms, with their opulent floral curtains and plush carpets.

Much to our delight, on arrival we are upgraded to two deluxe suites – mine has a super-king-size bed, adjoining lounge and two bathrooms, as well as stunning views of the grounds.

WAIL OF A TIME

I drove Irish Route 66 with deserted golden beaches and pirate-like islands

TEMPTED?

Tiny ‘Bali of Europe’ town with stunning beaches, €3 cocktails and £20 flights

There is no scrimping on the toiletries here either, with both Champneys and Elemis products, as well as soft white robes and slippers.

The standalone bath is the centrepiece of one bathroom, while the second has an invigorating rainforest shower.

The lounge is the perfect spot for a much-needed gossip, washed down with complimentary bubbles. Champneys, which celebrated its 100th birthday last year, also has more exercise classes than you can shake a stick at, from reformer Pilates to pickleball and HIIT, so we sign up for a legs, bums and tums class, followed by stretch and relax by candlelight.

There are also maps for walks in the extensive grounds and we enjoy a wholesome 45-minute stroll before dinner.

THE SPA

With its 25m pool, sauna, steam room, whirlpool and alfresco Jacuzzi, this is relaxation at its best – and that’s before you even book a treatment.

However, definitely do!

My 50-minute Upper Body Bliss massage, £105, using Elemis oils, was absolutely gorgeous and got rid of the tension I was holding in my shoulders after a stressful few months at work.

THE GRUB

There are so many delicious food options – stays are full-board, and breakfast and lunch are both buffets with tasty cereals, yoghurt, fresh fruit and bagels each morning and delicious meats, salads and pasta dishes come lunchtime.

But the evening menu is the star of the show.

We loved the pulled oyster mushroom taco and the crab and prawn summer rolls to start, while the sirloin steak with peppercorn sauce and the monkfish curry were both melt–in-the-mouth.

Make sure you leave room for the deconstructed honeycomb cheesecake for pudding, while the cheeseboard is also a winner.

OUT AND ABOUT

Forget it, you’re here to chill and chat.

BOOK IT

Full-board stays at Champneys, Tring, cost from £210 per person, per night (Champneys.com).

THE COUPLE’S ESCAPE – The Greenway Hotel & Spa, Cheltenham

Senior Assistant Editor Sarah Barns and husband Patrick cosied up in the Cotswolds.

THE PAD

Throw open the velvet drapes, take in the stunning views and relaaaax. Winner of four AA Red Stars, this gem, just 13 minutes’ drive from Gloucester train station, offers the perfect rural recharge.

The Elizabethan manor house blends historical charm with modern luxury, and although there are 21 newly refurbished bedrooms to choose from, our pick is the Manor Suite, where the bed is so large you can both starfish, the marble bathroom comes with a bath and walk-in rainfall shower, plus there’s a cosy living area.

THE SPA

Take a dip in the hydrotherapy pool and outdoor vitality pool, sweat it out in the sauna and steam room, and indulge in a TempleSpa treatment at the Elan spa, awarded five bubbles by the Good Spa Guide.

Hot stone massages, which use warm basalt stones (essentially giant black rocks) to harmonise energy points throughout the body, fixed our tense muscles and helped us instantly de-stress.

The Rocks Of The Mediterranean 75-minute treatment costs from £119 per person.

THE GRUB

The Garden Room restaurant, run by talented head chef Abhijit Dasalkar, offers a brilliant value à la carte dinner.

Think treats like Cornish crab with lemon, yuzu gel and edible flowers – one of the prettiest plates I’ve ever seen – and beef wellington served perfectly pink.

Three courses cost £67.50 per person.

Opt for the veggie Full English come morning – it’s a winner.

OUT AND ABOUT

Hit Cheltenham, 15 minutes’ drive away, for indie shops, as well as faves like Jo Malone, Toast and Reiss, plus Regency architecture.

Hatchards bookshop gives Hogwarts library feels, and Society Coffee serves up excellent flat whites, £4, and scrumptious chocolate cruffins, £3.95 (Society-cafe.com).

A short walk from the hotel is the Leckhampton Loop, a four-and- a-half-mile amble in gorgeous Cotswolds scenery.

Some parts are hilly, so you’ll have earned your lamb roast, £25.95, and sticky toffee pudding, £8.95, at The Frogmill (Thefrogmill.co.uk).

BOOK IT

B&B for two costs from £97 per person, including 90 minutes of spa use (Thegreenwayhotelandspa.com).

A fab find in Faversham

You don’t need a swish spa hotel in this Kent town, says Contributing Picture Editor Ruth Greatrex.

Embracing the therapeutic heat of the Finnish barrel sauna, my friend Katie and I gaze out at the vivid green fields, our skin slathered with sea-salt scrub, fragrant with rose petals and uplifting orange oil.

Staff are poised to bring juices, kombucha, or even a cocktail at the ding of a bell, too.

Once suitably baked, we brave the chilly overhead water bucket, then plunge into the ice-cold barrel.

A restorative soak in the wood-fired hot tub later, we both emerge with baby-soft skin and feel thoroughly revived.

A 90-minute session costs from £18 per person (Seascrubsauna.co.uk).

This Sea Scrub Sauna sits on the site of Macknade, one of England’s best farm shops and a family-run spot where apples and hops have grown since 1847.

We grab lunch at the new street-food village, digging into miso cream mushrooms, £11, at Hop Shed Bar & Kitchen, washed down with zingy Faversham bacchus, £9 a glass, and finishing with brown butter popcorn ice cream, £4.15, from Bears Ice Cream, before checking out the amazing food hall (Macknade.com).

Family-owned country estate Mount Ephraim Gardens is 10 minutes’ drive away and offers rooms.

We play ladies of the manor, strolling through the pretty rose gardens and even spy the sea from the Sir Edwyn Suite, which has a freestanding bath.

Double rooms cost from £150 per night (Mountephraimgardens.co.uk).

Come morning, we’re tempted back to Macknade for pancakes with blood orange and rhubarb compote, £12.

Although there are HIIT and spin classes on offer, I go for a soothing hot-stone aromatherapy massage, from £35 for 30 minutes (@Serene_ massage_therapies).

You don’t need long here to rediscover your zen. . .

Iran says it’s reviewing Washington’s latest response to a proposed ceasefire framework following Pakistani mediation. In a panel discussion, a former US State Department official and a Qatari academic discussed what options remain on the table.

While the United States backs away from threats to resume bombing Iran if it does not agree to a peace deal, Israel’s political establishment is reportedly itching for war.

Shimon Riklin, an anchor for the right-wing Israeli Channel 14, blurted out apparently confidential plans about a renewed attack on Tehran, which included the location of what he claimed was a uranium storage facility that could be targeted.

Members of the Israeli parliament roundly criticised Riklin’s supposed revelations, leading the anchor to say his comments were purely hypothetical.

Still, despite broad agreement that Israel is eager to restart hostilities, it is unlikely to be able to do so without US permission. That does not look like it will be quick in coming. Reports of a call overnight between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump over Washington’s push for a truce irrespective of Israeli concerns left the Israeli leader reportedly with his “hair on fire”.

This week, Israeli media reported that Netanyahu chaired the second meeting of his security cabinet to discuss renewing the conflict with Iran. Despite billions of dollars in Israeli and US ordnance thrown at Iran, the government in Tehran remains in place.

Iran’s deterrence strategy of striking regional states and the subsequent closure of the Strait of Hormuz has dented the US’s appetite for renewing a costly and perhaps unremitting war against Tehran.

Iranophobia

For Netanyahu, the April 8 ceasefire – agreed with little Israeli involvement – has proven politically costly and, analysts say, unnerved a public conditioned to view Iran as an existential threat.

Opposition leader Yair Lapid and former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett have used the ceasefire as political currency in their attacks on Netanyahu. Lapid described the truce as one of the greatest “political disasters in all of our history”, a view that appears to be in line with that of the Israeli public.

A poll conducted by the Israel Democracy Institute in early May showed that a majority of Israelis believed a premature end to the war ran counter to their country’s security interests, while a similar percentage thought that a resumption of the conflict is likely.

To a public and political class accustomed to viewing Iran as their number one nemesis, it is unclear what solution they want in dealing with Tehran, Haggai Ram of Ben-Gurion University told Al Jazeera.

“Both politicians and public have been inculcated into seeing Iran as their ultimate foe,” said Ram, whose book Iranophobia chronicles Israel’s longstanding fixation on Iran.

Israeli people have been effectively trained for most of their lives to see war as inevitable, Ram said, a situation evident in their approach to bomb shelters when Iranian missiles fell, with Israelis whom Ram met at the time seemingly unfazed by the experience.

“It was perfectly normal to them that they should effectively stop their lives if it prevented Iran from completing its nuclear programme, or, from their perspective, if it helped ‘free the people’,” he said.

The only question for many Israelis, Ram said, is how Netanyahu – regarded in some quarters as a “magician” – would bring Iran to its knees.

Political necromancy

Many in Israel have grown accustomed to seeing Netanyahu defy the laws of political gravity. In 2022, he won an election despite being hounded by multiple corruption charges. He has managed to distance himself from the security failures of the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, and achieved credit – even if he officially denies it – for allegedly manipulating Trump into joining the war on Iran.

The October 2023 attacks and the US-brokered truce with Iran, which Israel had no role in, will be the foremost political concerns on Netanyahu’s mind, Alon Pinkas, a former Israeli ambassador and consul general in New York, told Al Jazeera. He noted that these could serve as an incentive for resuming military operations.

“My guess is there are three interlocking reasons why Netanyahu is looking to restart the war,” Pinkas said. “Firstly, there’s the distance he wants to put between him and October 7 – he needs a big strategic victory and he’s not going to get that in Gaza or Lebanon, so this is it.

“Secondly, the war wasn’t finished. Every taxi driver or second-rate political commentator will tell you: Israel achieved nothing with its war on Iran.

“Thirdly, and you only need to look at the polls to see it, he needs a victory with Iran to take with him into the [election] later this year.”

Iran’s seizure of the Strait of Hormuz, which has thrown global markets into turmoil, as well as Tehran’s strikes on its neighbours, appear to be consequences that Netanyahu never considered when starting the conflict. Israel’s failures in the war on Iran are expected to be key debates in the general election, slated for August.

Geopolitical shizzle

A few weeks after the April 8 ceasefire, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz boasted that once the US gave the green light, Israel was ready to bomb them “back to the Stone Ages”, highlighting the government’s eagerness to restart the conflict.

“There are those in Israel who would like to cut their losses and walk away,” former Israeli government adviser Daniel Levy told Al Jazeera.

“And then there are those, like Netanyahu, and much of the Israeli political mainstream, who want to double down and use all that US hardware [assembled off the coast of Iran] in an attempt to seriously degrade Iran.”

Ultimately, despite the broad political support for a renewed war with Israel, there are still limits to what Netanyahu can do. “This stops when the US says it stops,” Levy said.

Or, as Trump said of Netanyahu after their overnight call on Tuesday, he’ll “do whatever I want him to do”.

Nearly three months after the United States and Israel launched their large-scale bombing campaign against Iran and about six weeks since the April 8 ceasefire took effect, President Trump faces an inflection point. Does he return to war? Maintain the ceasefire and U.S. blockade on Iranian ports in the hope of cutting a deal on American terms? Or drop his maximalist negotiating stance?

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), an informal foreign policy advisor for the White House, continues to press for more aggressive U.S. military action. Trump’s political advisors would prefer that the war end as soon as possible to minimize political repercussions against the Republican Party in a midterm election year.

Trump seems conflicted. Despite weeks of U.S. bombardment and an ongoing naval blockade, Tehran is as protective of its nuclear program today as it was before the war began. “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them,” Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend. A day later, Trump took to the social media platform again to announce he suspended planned U.S. attacks on Iran to give talks more time.

Unfortunately for Trump, he’s proved to be his own worst enemy on this subject. Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium and Tehran’s effective control of the Strait of Hormuz, the regime’s two biggest cards, are a byproduct of Trump’s own policy decisions.

The first is a clear indictment of Trump’s first-term order to withdraw the United States from the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a highly technical accord that put Iran’s nuclear work in a box by restricting the number and quality of centrifuges it could use, capped the amount of enriched uranium it could produce and compelled Tehran to ship 97% of its stockpile out of the country. When the Trump administration scrapped that hard-won deal, Iran responded by enriching more nuclear material at a faster pace and accumulating the very stockpile the Trump administration is now seeking to neutralize.

The Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s second card, would not even be an issue today if the Trump administration had refrained from going to war in the first place. On Feb. 27, the day before the conflict began, more than 150 tankers and vessels traveled through the strait. The international waterway was open for business.

Not so today. On Thursday, a grand total of three crossings were registered in the waterway. This collapse of commerce is a consequence of Iran’s ability to harass civilian tankers so much that shipping companies no longer view the journey as worth the cost. As Adm. Brad Cooper, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday: “The Iranian capability to stop commerce has been dramatically depleted through the strait, but their voice is very loud. And those threats are clearly heard by the merchant industry and insurance industry.”

By virtue of his own actions, Trump is now left with a series of policy options that range from least bad to terrible. None of them are ideal, and all of them carry some risk.

For starters, Trump could resume the war. Any renewed U.S. bombing campaign would probably expand the U.S. military’s original set of targets to include a portion of Iran’s energy infrastructure, which Trump has threatened repeatedly to hit. A U.S. invasion of Kharg Island, where 90% of Iran’s oil processing takes place, might also be up for discussion. The aim would be to destroy Iran’s remaining military capabilities and further squeeze its oil revenue until Tehran’s strategic calculus on the war shifts to Washington’s liking.

Yet there are no guarantees that doubling down on military force will work. Trump’s entire strategy has relied on a baseline assumption: The more punitive the United States is, the more likely Tehran will be to cave. Yet that simply hasn’t occurred. If anything, Iran is more dug in now than it was in the opening days of the conflict. For the regime, capitulating to Trump is as dangerous as losing the war. Why would more bombing succeed where previous bombing failed?

The risks of additional U.S. military action are considerable as well. Before the ceasefire, Iran was launching ballistic missiles and attack drones across multiple gulf Arab states, hitting Qatar’s largest natural gas processing facility, Saudi Arabia’s east-west oil pipeline and Dubai’s luxurious high-rises. As the Iranians have stated, such attacks will not only resume if Trump orders a resumption of the war but will expand to new targets, including desalination facilities and nuclear power plants. Such strikes would raise global oil and gas prices to even more absurd levels, adding to the extra $40 billion the American people are already paying for fuel since the war began.

What about continuing the status quo? While this contingency would be less costly than another round of bombing or a U.S. ground invasion, it’s unclear whether it would help or hurt negotiations toward a settlement. There’s a possibility that extending the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports could merely reaffirm the regime’s earlier decision to preserve its own shutdown of the strait. Iran is now urging Washington to end its blockade before talks on the nuclear file can be held. And it’s a mystery whether Trump’s blockade is working anyway; the U.S. intelligence community assesses that Iran could withstand this pressure point for three to four more months, which may be too long for Trump to sustain given the oil disruptions that are bound to get worse.

Striking an agreement to end the war, return the strait to open traffic and restrict Iran’s nuclear program would be the most beneficial policy for the United States with the least amount of cost attached — not quite undoing the harm from Trump’s first-term decision to scrap the nuclear deal and his second-term decision to start a war. U.S. and Iranian negotiators are passing proposals back and forth as we speak. But as of now, Trump can’t stomach agreeing to a deal that covers some of Iran’s terms, including but not limited to a shorter suspension of enriched uranium and some kind of Iranian role in the management of the strait. Even if Trump did reassess his position, he would be forced to confront the hawks in his political coalition who would consider anything short of Iran’s total surrender a failure.

In short, Trump is in an unenviable position. He’s got nobody to blame but himself.

Daniel R. DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities and a syndicated foreign affairs columnist.