What is US President Donald Trump’s “game plan” after the announcement of a five-day interregnum in his war of choice against Iran? 

Nothing can be inferred definitively, given that Trump deliberately cultivates ambiguity and uncertainty. 

But did the US president make this announcement to manipulate financial and stock markets? Is he seeking a brief reprieve before striking the proverbial “crushing blow”? Is Trump creating a false narrative to drive a wedge in Iran’s power-political structure? 

By singling out a political representative, is he attempting to craft a narrative around that individual, creating an “Iranian Delcy Rodríguez”? Or is he genuine and sincere in his peace overture?

To repeat, nothing can be inferred with certainty. What can be stated in clear, robust terms is that the latest twist and turn in the US and Israel’s war of choice stems from Iran’s able, deft, and robust resistance to this imposed war of aggression on its people. We can only speculate and hypothesize. 

Sharif Briefs Saudi Crown Prince as Pak Pushes to Mediate US-Iran Talks

The Solipsist in Charge of a Superpower

For the sake of the latter, let us assume that “all of the above” informs Trump’s calculus, and that within this matrix he is playing on various variables, hoping for a favourable outcome, or in more prosaic terms, an exit.

But why is Trump, with the most efficient and effective war machine at his command, seeking this outcome? 

For this, the credit goes to Iran and its resilient people. They rallied around the republic, with its armed forces fighting an asymmetric war. 

This resistance raised the costs of war by, first, globalizing the conflict, and second, targeting the pain points of a much stronger adversary. 

While the immediate impact is felt in the economic domain, the more lasting and dangerous consequences lie in politics, particularly for the United States.

Consider this. Trump and his brand of politics, Trumpism, sought to “liberate” America from the shackles of liberalism-informed globalism. Within this lay a promise to the American people: not to fight “wars of choice” such as Iraq, Afghanistan, and, in a loose sense, Libya. 

These wars, conceived by a narrow elite but fought by ordinary Americans, cost the country militarily, economically, and financially. The brunt of globalism and America’s wars of choice was felt by ordinary white Americans. 

Trump reached out to them with the slogan “Make America Great Again” (MAGA). This resonated with what is called Trump’s base, and he won a decisive victory in 2024. 

Components of the MAGA promise included tariffs, echoing mercantilism, reshoring industry back to America, undercutting inflationary pressures, lowering interest rates, expanding home ownership for ordinary Americans, and, above all, ending wars of choice.

But on February 26, 2026, all this was given short shrift. 

The United States, along with Israel, while engaging in negotiations with Iran, launched a covert attack. Despite decapitation strikes and intense aerial bombardment, Iran resisted ably. 

As the war drags on, the costs are becoming increasingly clear. But does this matter to Trump? Yes, and quite poignantly so.

The war, first, is very unpopular in the United States. Second, the costs are becoming obvious: higher oil prices, rising inflation, and a drag on global economic growth. 

Despite the United States being somewhat insulated from higher oil prices, its economy remains vulnerable. Oil prices correlate with exchange rates, and there are other linkages to both the real economy and stock markets. 

If the war drags on, there is a distinct probability of higher inflation, higher interest rates, and fiscal pressures, issues that will significantly affect Trump’s MAGA base.

Now, it needs to be stated that, to fulfill the MAGA agenda, Trump realized that one term would not be enough. He has suggested the possibility of seeking a third term. 

Despite the US Constitution precluding this, a loophole has been discussed that could, in theory, allow him to return to the presidency. His Vice President, Vance, could contest the presidential election and, if he were to win, potentially step aside in Trump’s favour.

However, the wildcard now is the imposed war of aggression on Iran and the unexpected turn it has taken. 

Amid the fog and cacophony of war, Vance has been conspicuously silent. At stake is political power and the future of the MAGA movement. 

If, for the sake of hypothesis, Trump is being dishonest with the Iranians and obscuring his agenda, this may be the moment for Iran to respond in kind.

While Iran should continue to signal its resistance to America’s war and discredit the latest overtures, it can, sooner rather than later, make it known that it is willing to negotiate with Vance. This could be complemented by an intervention from world powers that guarantees an open-ended but definitive non-aggression pact. 

Once this is in the public domain, Iran should seek an end to all hostilities against it.

By advocating an “ente-ente” that provides ironclad guarantees, negotiations could begin between mid-level functionaries and Vance. 

If Trump is merely seeking time or an exit to reconnect with his base, to strengthen his position in the US midterms and beyond, this is the course Iran might consider. 

But if he is serious and sincere, Iran can engage him directly, seeking commitments underpinned by world powers and the United States itself.

The choice is entirely Iran’s. It holds all the aces, but it must play them well.

© Kashmir Observer