Gulf pressure, rising oil prices and voter anger: The forces behind Trump’s pause on Iran attack

President Donald Trump has once again postponed a large-scale military strike against Iran, underlining the complicated mix of diplomacy, regional pressure and domestic political anxiety now shaping Washington’s approach to the war.

Trump said the United States had been preparing to launch a major assault today (May 19), but the operation was delayed after urgent appeals from leaders in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. According to the president, the Gulf states informed Washington that serious negotiations were under way and that there was a genuine possibility of a diplomatic breakthrough.

Explaining his decision to reporters yesterday, Trump said: “We were getting ready to do a very major attack tomorrow, and I put it off for a little while, hopefully maybe forever, but possibly for a little while, because we’ve had very big discussions with Iran, and we’ll see what they amount to.” He added that he preferred a negotiated settlement over another military escalation, saying: “If we can do that without bombing the hell out of them, I’d be very happy.”

The negotiations, mediated primarily through Pakistan, centre on a set of highly contentious issues that reveal the very different priorities of the parties involved.

For the Trump administration, Iran’s nuclear programme remains the central issue. Trump has repeatedly insisted that any agreement must permanently prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Beyond that, Washington is also seeking to dismantle Iran’s missile arsenal, weaken its naval capabilities and sever its ties with regional proxy militias operating across the Middle East.

The Gulf monarchies, however, are driven more by immediate security and economic concerns than by the broader strategic goals pursued by Washington. Their priority is to stop Iranian missile strikes targeting vital infrastructure, including desalination plants, ports and energy facilities. They also want the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which nearly 20 per cent of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments pass.

Iran’s effective blockade of the strait has sent global energy prices sharply higher, creating economic and political pressures across the Gulf region and beyond. Gulf leaders fear that a prolonged conflict could severely damage their economies and destabilise the region further.

Iran, meanwhile, is demanding sweeping concessions in return for any settlement. Tehran wants an end to the US naval blockade, the release of frozen Iranian assets, compensation for war-related damages and the lifting of crippling economic sanctions.

The conflict has deepened Iran’s already severe economic crisis. Inflation has surged, shortages have worsened and public frustration has grown increasingly visible. Iranian authorities appear deeply concerned about the possibility of widespread unrest. Human rights organisations report that thousands of people have been arrested since the war began, while numerous executions have been carried out against individuals accused of espionage or political dissent.

Yet, despite the immense military and economic pressure placed upon it, Iran continues to pose a credible threat to both US forces and America’s Gulf allies.

According to Pentagon assessments, Iran used the ceasefire earlier in the conflict to adapt its military strategy and strengthen its defences. Iranian forces reportedly reopened damaged underground ballistic missile facilities carved into granite mountains, repositioned mobile missile launchers and closely studied American air operations.

American officials also believe Russia may have assisted Iran in analysing American flight patterns and tactics. That intelligence, according to Pentagon officials, made some US operations more predictable and exposed American aircraft to increased hostile fire.

This resilience has alarmed Gulf governments, many of which fear that the conflict could spiral into a wider regional war capable of devastating critical infrastructure and disrupting global energy supplies for months.

Trump’s decision to delay the planned strike is also closely linked to mounting political pressures at home. As the November midterm elections approach, the war has increasingly become a political burden for the Republican Party. Opinion polls suggest that the conflict is deeply unpopular with the American public. Around 64 per cent of voters reportedly believe the decision to enter the war was a mistake.

The economic consequences have intensified public frustration. Pentagon estimates suggest the war has already cost at least $29 billion, while rising fuel prices are adding to inflationary pressures across the United States. For many American voters, concerns about the cost of living increasingly outweigh foreign policy considerations.

White House officials are worried that a prolonged and expensive conflict could jeopardise Republican hopes of retaining control of Congress. Historically, wars that begin as displays of strength can quickly become political liabilities when economic pain begins to affect ordinary households.

Still, despite the temporary pause, the possibility of a dramatic military escalation remains very real. Trump has made clear that the Pentagon remains on standby for a major assault should negotiations collapse. The president said he had instructed senior military officials “to be prepared to go forward with a full, large scale assault of Iran, on a moment’s notice, in the event that an acceptable Deal is not reached”.