The Danger (and Futility) of Presidential Power: Trump’s Threats and the War in Iran

by John Whitehead

—

A terrifying escalation in the United States’ war against Iran seemed all too likely earlier in April. As of this writing, the prospect of escalation appears to have diminished somewhat. Nevertheless, recent events have shown the extreme dangers posed by the current war and by the power of the American president.

Threats to Kill a Civilization

Since the US-Israeli campaign against Iran began, the Iranian government has retaliated by limiting the passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway off Iran’s southern coast. Roughly one fifth of the world’s oil supply flows through the Strait, and Iran’s actions have led to global oil prices skyrocketing.

Frustration over the war’s effect on oil prices presumably prompted US President Donald Trump to issue a series of threats against Iran. Writing on his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump said on April 1 that he would consider a ceasefire with Iran “when Hormuz Strait is open, free, and clear. Until then, we are blasting Iran into oblivion or, as they say, back to the Stone Ages!!!” 

In another Truth Social post on April 5, Trump specifically threatened to bomb Iranian civilian infrastructure such as bridges and power plants on the following Tuesday, April 7. He said the Iranians would be “living in Hell” unless they “Open the F-----’ Strait, you crazy bastards.” The post also included a mocking reference to Islam. 

Trump made further threats against Iran the next day, telling reporters that “The entire country can be taken out in one night and that night might be tomorrow night.” He also said “every bridge in Iran will be decimated by 12 o’clock tomorrow night” and “every power plant in Iran will be out of business, burning, exploding, and never to be used again.”

By this point in the war some preliminary negotiations between the United States and Iran were underway, which offered the possibility of a diplomatic alternative to escalation. Trump was apparently impatient with the negotiations’ progress, though, and opted to issue his most dire threat. 

Trump stated on Truth Social on Tuesday, April 7, that “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” He also allowed that “maybe something revolutionarily wonderful can happen, WHO KNOWS?”, implying that the danger to Iran could be averted if the Iranian government re-opened the Strait or otherwise cooperated. A similar message was conveyed privately to the Iranians, the New York Times reported. 

US Vice President J.D. Vance elaborated on the president’s threat, telling reporters, “We're not going to strike energy and infrastructure targets until the Iranians either make a proposal that we can get behind or don't make a proposal. But [Trump has] given them until Tuesday, at eight o'clock.” 

The Israeli military reinforced the Trump administration’s threats to Iran’s infrastructure. A statement posted on social media by the Israel Defense Forces warned Iranians to “refrain from using and traveling by train throughout Iran” on April 7. “Your presence on trains and near railway lines endangers your life.”

Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps responded with its own threats, saying that Iran would “deprive the United States and its allies of oil and gas in the region for years” and “we will not hesitate to retaliate against the vile aggression against civilian facilities.”

While the Iranian government publicly defied the United States, the Iranian people prepared to endure intensified bombing. People stocked up on necessities, the media issued instructions on what to do if electricity and water went out, and tens of thousands of people tried to flee to areas that might be relatively safer. 

To avert the threatened US escalation against Iran, a variety of other countries intervened. China, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, and Qatar all reached out to Iran. China, the biggest purchaser of Iranian oil, seemed to exert the greatest influence in these diplomatic efforts. The Iranian government agreed to cooperate, and the United States responded in kind. Tuesday evening, Trump announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran and plans for further negotiations.   

Ceasefire Aftermath

Since the ceasefire announcement on April 7, the situation has veered wildly between escalation and de-escalation. Despite the US-Iran ceasefire, Israel initially continued and intensified its campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon, bombing the Lebanese capital of Beirut. Then a 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon was reached on April 16. Meanwhile, marathon talks between Vice President Vance and Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran’s Parliament, failed to reach a longer-term agreement to end the war.

A central obstacle to a more lasting truce continues to be the question of the passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz. Following the failed Vance-Ghalibaf talks, the United States has tried to put pressure on the Iranians by establishing a naval blockade on shipping to or from Iran. For their part, the Iranians seemed inclined to re-open passage through the Strait of Hormuz following the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire but have still continued to limit passage through the Strait. Their position is that the Strait will not be fully re-opened until the US blockade ends. President Trump’s position is that the blockade will continue “until such time as our transaction with Iran is 100% complete.”

Despite the promising signs of the ceasefires, whether the various parties will negotiate an end to this war remains unclear. Without a negotiated resolution, the fighting may begin again and escalate to another crisis point such as we saw on April 7. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has already said as much, telling the press on April 16 that “Our forces are maximally postured to restart combat operations should this new Iranian regime choose poorly and not agree to a deal.” Addressing the Iranians, Hegseth added, “We are locked and loaded on your critical dual-use infrastructure, on your remaining power generation and on your energy industry.”

The Power to Destroy but Not to Get His Way

What will happen next in this war is unclear, but recent events have made a couple points clear. Or rather, they have reminded us of a couple points that have already been clear for some time.

First, the fates of huge numbers of people rest on the decisions of just a handful of exceptionally powerful people. 

President Trump, by waging war against Iran, has already killed and caused misery to people in that country. The Iranian Red Crescent Society, the country’s main humanitarian relief organization, estimated on April 2 that at least 763 schools and 316 health care facilities had been either destroyed or damaged in the war. The New York Times has verified damage to 22 schools and 17 health care facilities. 

The most infamous incident involving a school was the bombing of Shajarah Tayyebeh Elementary School on February 28, which killed 175 people, most of them children. Other bombings that day had lower but no less horrifying tolls. An American air strike on a communications tower damaged a boys’ elementary school, killing one student, according to Iranian state media. Another air strike damaged an elementary school, sports hall, and blood transfusion center (a nearby military facility may have been the intended target). A Times analysis identified six people, including at least four children, as being killed in this bombing. 

If US forces had made good on President Trump’s threat of expanded bombing on infrastructure, the death and suffering among Iranian civilians would likely have been even more severe. If US forces escalate attacks on infrastructure in the future, greater death and suffering will be the result.

Moreover, while his specific threats may have been against bridges and electricity generation, the language used by Trump hinted at a more disturbing possibility. His references to how the “entire country can be taken out in one night” and “A whole civilization will die tonight” raised the specter of the United States using nuclear weapons against Iran. 

A nuclear attack does not seem to be a realistic possibility yet, but Trump’s grotesque threats remind us that the American president—in contrast to the leaders of Iran, Lebanon, or most other states—does have the ability to use nuclear weapons. The decision to use such weapons rests entirely on the single person who holds the office of president of the United States. No legal or institutional check prevents the president from resorting to nuclear weapons. This is the situation the Iranians and all the world live under today.

Second, behind the president’s bloodthirsty rhetoric I cannot help but detect something else: desperation. Iran’s control of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and the resulting shortages of oil and other resources, combined with high prices, is a major political problem for Trump. Discontent over the war’s economic fallout could undermine domestic support for Trump and his party. The threats against Iran seem like the actions of a man trapped in a difficult situation trying to bluff and bluster his way out.  

Bluff and bluster aside, though, it seems very unlikely that the Iranian government will open the Strait of Hormuz unless the war ends or they can extract other concessions. A blockade or expanded bombing is probably not going to make the Iranians do what Trump wants. The president has enormous power to destroy but not to get his way.

In this respect, the US campaign against Iran parallels another Middle East war, the war Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states waged against the Houthis in Yemen. For almost a decade, a coalition of wealthy oil-producing countries, backed by the United States, bombed and blockaded their poor neighbor and helped bring about the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. Yet they did not defeat the Houthis, who remain in place in Yemen.

The American president has a dangerous degree of power, but that power does not necessarily translate into the ability to shape other countries’ behavior, and it certainly does not do so in the case of Iran. Continuing or escalating the US bombing of Iran will not accomplish anything except kill more human beings. 

All parties to this conflict should negotiate and be willing to make concessions to bring this war to an end. Those of us who are Americans should consider whether the time has come to limit the power of the president, particularly in the realm of waging war.