Takeaways from Trump’s speech on Iran

WASHINGTON – US President Donald Trump staunchly defended his handling of the month-old, US-Israeli war on Iran in a primetime address on April 1, saying the US military was nearing completion of its mission while also reinforcing his threats to bomb the Islamic Republic back to the Stone Age.

He delivered his 19-minute speech against a backdrop of high global oil prices and his own low approval ratings.

Here are some key takeaways:

Looking for an exit – but not quite yet

Mr Trump, facing a war-wary American public and sliding poll numbers, said the US had destroyed Iran’s navy and air force, crippled its ballistic missile and nuclear programme and would continue to hit them “extremely hard” over the next two to three weeks.

But beyond that, even while saying the US military was on track to complete its objectives “very shortly,” he stopped short of offering a firm timeline for an end to hostilities.

Mr Trump’s use of his speech to reiterate threats and send mixed messages may do little to calm jittery financial markets and ease the concerns of an American public that has shown little support for the country’s biggest military operation since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

The often conflicting signals that Mr Trump has issued throughout the course of the conflict have only added to confusion, with the President one moment calling for a diplomatic settlement and in the next threatening to rain further destruction on Iran amid a continuing US military build-up in the region.

The Strait of Hormuz

Mr Trump’s comments on April 1 were not clear about whether US military operations could end even before Iran reopened the Strait of Hormuz, the vital waterway on which it has a chokehold that has created the worst global energy shock in history.

He instead repeated his calls for countries that rely on Gulf oil to “take the lead” and assume the burden of reopening the waterway, not the US, which he said does not need energy supplies from the region.

Western allies, however, have resisted joining a war that he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu started without consulting them.

In his speech, however, Mr Trump stopped short of saying, as he has in recent media interviews, that he is considering withdrawing from NATO over what he sees as its failure to support the US in the Iran conflict.

The risk, analysts say, is that Iran would essentially be left with significant leverage over the strait, the passageway for a fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas shipments.

Washington’s Gulf allies may also resent a hasty US exit, given that they could be left with a wounded, hostile neighbour.

Mission accomplished?

Mr Trump touted the US military’s successes in the conflict but questions remain about whether he has truly achieved the main goal he laid out at the start of the war: closing off Iran’s path to a nuclear weapon.

More than a month later, Iran still has a stockpile of highly enriched uranium that could be processed to bomb grade, but it is believed to be mostly buried underground by US-Israeli bombing in June 2025.

Mr Trump, in a sudden reversal from his demands that Iran turn over the enriched uranium, told Reuters earlier on April 1 that he no longer cared about the material because it was “so far underground” and US satellites could keep an eye on the area. Iran has always denied seeking a nuclear bomb.

While threatening new air strikes if Iran tries to move the stockpile, he made no mention of sending special forces on a risky mission to seize it, which US officials have said is among the options under consideration.

However, any deployment of ground troops would likely anger most Americans.

Despite Mr Trump’s claims of having destroyed Iran’s conventional military capabilities, it has demonstrated that its remaining missiles and drones can still be used to target Israel, as well as US Gulf allies and American military installations housed on their land.

And Mr Trump’s earlier calls for the overthrow of Iran’s theocratic rulers have gone unfulfilled.

US-Israeli air strikes killed many of the top leaders, including supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but they have been replaced by even more hardline successors, including Mr Khamenei’s son. US intelligence has deemed the Iranian government largely intact.

Domestic politics

Mr Trump’s speech, his first primetime address since the war started on Feb 28, was originally seen as being aimed at easing Americans’ concerns about the interventionist tendencies of a president who campaigned for his second term on a promise to keep the US out of “stupid” military interventions.

But Mr Trump, whose advisers have pressed him to show the public that he considers kitchen-table issues a priority, gave only a nod to Americans’ anxieties and appeared to dismiss their economic pain as temporary and sure to ease once the war is over.

“Many Americans have been concerned to see the recent rise in gasoline prices here at home,” he said.

“This short-term increase has been entirely the result of the Iranian regime launching deranged terror attacks against commercial oil tankers of neighbouring countries that have nothing to do with the conflict.”

While Mr Trump’s MAGA movement has mostly stood with him, his grip on his political base could weaken if the economic impact, including high petrol prices, persists with his Republican Party scrambling to keep control of Congress in November’s midterm elections.

Mr Trump’s overall approval rating has fallen to 36 per cent, the lowest since his return to the White House, a Reuters/Ipsos poll completed on March 30 found.

After his TV appearance, stocks fell, the dollar strengthened and oil rose as Mr Trump stopped short of providing a clear outline for when the war would end.

The market reaction reflects a basic problem with Mr Trump’s dissonant messaging: he wants to reassure Americans that the war will be over soon, while at the same time threatening Iran with new attacks and suggesting he may leave without opening the Strait of Hormuz.

Flat performance?

The address on April 1 offered Mr Trump precious primetime viewership and a chance to reset with voters.

He made a dramatic entrance, walking through double doors in the White House residence to approach the podium.

But for the next 19 minutes, he spoke in a mostly subdued tone in a dimly lit room, sticking to well-worn talking points instead of clarifying his reasons for taking the US to war.

It was a far cry from the usual public appearances of the former reality TV star who was in front of probably his biggest audience since February’s State of the Union address. REUTERS