Australia and the World Past and Present

What exactly is Donald Trump’s objective in Iran. There has been a lot of speculation about this recently.

This is understandable.

As human beings, we look for patterns that help us to understand the world around us.

And for the most part, national leaders usually have a vision that remains relatively consistent.

National governments usually have some identifiable national interests or policies.

Trump’s motivations seem more elusive than those of past presidents.

Commentators are having a harder time explaining his actions.

There is more divergence among competing theories.

One theory centers around oil – and ultimately power.

Much of the world is powered by oil. Most countries are powered by oil. The US is. China is. Other countries are too. Control oil and you control the world, so the theory goes.

So did Trump enter the current conflict in order to control the world’s supply of oil?

There is a some evidence to support that view.

First of all, there was the action he took against Venezuela. Under Maduro, much of Venezuela’s oil was going to China. Trump views China as an economic competitor. He wants China weakened and America strengthened.

US forces even bordered oil tankers travelling from Venezuela and took their oil. So this action against Venezuela can be seen as a realignment of the world supply of oil, away from China and towards America.

Now to the case of Iran.

In the short term, the conflict is a disaster for world oil production, the price of oil and stability.

Around a quarter of the world’s oil is shipped right past Iran. So this is a high-stakes situation.

In the short term, the price of oil will explode. This will hurt most countries around the world, and we can expect it hurt the US too.

But what about the in the long term?

Will the US be able to control oil production in the region? This is where it ties into regime change.

If there is significant change to the Iranian regime, and an administration emerged there that is willing to coexist with Israel and American influence in the region, then perhaps the US might benefit in the long run.

But there are many moving parts in that equation.

Or is it more the case that Netanyahu has persuaded Trump that the Iranian regime will never give up on their nuclear ambition and that it needs to be removed once and for all. Perhaps he has persuaded Trump that the regime represents a danger not just to Israel, but to the rest of the world – to an extent that warrants the current conflict.

There could be another explanation.

At the moment US foreign policy is the personal policy of Donald Trump. Whatever he wants goes. And he is incredibly erratic.

Trump appears concerned about himself more than anything. He particularly craves media attention.

Wild decisions on his part draw a huge amount of media attention. And if there is one thing that he loves, it is attention.

The Venezuela experience gave him the sense that the US could implement massive changes at the drop of a hat.

The military operation in Venezuela was very brief. There is no ongoing entanglement there. There are no American boots on the ground.

The operation in Iran is longer and more widespread.

The Venezuelan operation was relatively contained. It did not spill over into surrounding countries.

The current conflict in the Middle East has. Iran is targeting facilities in neighbouring countries.

Perhaps Trump’s strategy is not as extensive as some people believe.

Yes, he is happy with more power for America and less for China. Yes, he wants to control more oil and see other countries have less.

But more than that, he is prone to quick decisions here and quick decisions there. He doesn’t seem to be as strategic in his thinking as previous American presidents. His National Security Advisor in his first administration, John Bolton, had previously stated that Trump is incapable of strategic thought. It would appear that Trump is more impulsive and his threshold for starting military conflict is significantly lower than his predecessors.