\n<\/p>\n
Welcome back to Foreign Policy<\/em>\u2019s SitRep, where your coauthors are fighting off jet lag after finally returning to the United States post-Munich Security Conference (with some stops in other cities along the way). John is also dealing with the shocking revelation that Rishi has never seen The Godfather<\/em>, among other iconic films, which we hope he addresses by next week\u2019s edition.<\/p>\n Alright, here\u2019s what\u2019s on tap for the day: The rising likelihood of U.S. strikes<\/strong> on Iran<\/strong>, the first Board of Peace<\/strong> meeting, and Trump<\/strong>\u2019s mixed signals toward Taiwan<\/strong>.<\/p>\n There\u2019s growing speculation that a new war could be on the horizon in the Middle East as the United States drastically boosts its military presence in the region amid rising tensions with Iran. It\u2019s unclear if U.S. President Donald Trump has decided whether to attack\u2014and his administration is still engaged in diplomatic talks with Iran\u2014but the U.S. military could reportedly<\/a> be prepared to strike as early as this weekend.<\/p>\n If diplomacy fails, Trump has not been clear on whether he would pursue regime change, as some of his allies in Congress<\/a> have pushed for, or focus on further crippling Iran\u2019s military and nuclear capabilities.<\/p>\n Trump has been threatening strikes for weeks\u2014initially over Tehran\u2019s deadly crackdown on mass anti-government protests but more recently in relation to his push for a nuclear deal. This makes it difficult to pinpoint what Trump\u2019s endgame would be, particularly after the U.S. attack on key Iranian nuclear facilities last June. Trump claimed that those strikes \u201cobliterated\u201d Iran\u2019s nuclear program, but the fact that the U.S. is still negotiating with Tehran over the matter is one of many pieces of evidence that that\u2019s not the case.<\/p>\n The rising odds of a U.S. attack.<\/strong> To get a better picture of where this could all go, SitRep spoke with Jonathan Panikoff, who served as deputy national intelligence officer for the Near East at the U.S. National Intelligence Council from 2015 to 2020, including under the first Trump administration.<\/p>\n The development of the force posture in the region and the way it\u2019s \u201cincreasing in size and scope, makes it less and less likely that you see the president walk away from strikes,\u201d said Panikoff, who is now the director of the Scowcroft Middle East Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council.<\/p>\n The U.S. has roughly 12 warships deployed in the Middle East and will soon have two carrier strike groups in the region (the USS Gerald R. Ford<\/em> carrier strike group, which until recently had been deployed in the Caribbean, is en route). The U.S. has also boosted its airpower in the region with an additional 50 fighter jets, as well as communications and refueling aircraft<\/a>.<\/p>\n Panikoff said the fact that two carrier strike groups\u2014both of which consist of thousands of personnel, dozens of aircraft, and accompanying warships\u2014have been deployed stands out to him as a sign that the administration is planning to act and that it will be part of a \u201csustained campaign\u201d rather than focused on an individual target. \u201cIf you\u2019re planning for a campaign of weeks, not of hours or days, this is the type of footprint that you would need to put into the region,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Iranian retaliation should also be expected, and both U.S. forces and allies in the region such as Israel could be targets. \u201cThe longer it goes, the greater the set of targets the Iranians will seek,\u201d Panikoff said.<\/p>\n Giving peace a chance (maybe).<\/strong> The Trump administration held a second round of indirect talks with Iran on its nuclear program in Geneva this week. Though both sides have expressed cautious optimism about the process and have left the door open for a third round of talks, Washington and Tehran remain at odds over key issues ranging from uranium enrichment to Iran\u2019s ballistic program, and overcoming those disagreements will be difficult.<\/p>\n Trump on Thursday said that \u201cgood talks\u201d are being had with Iran but that the years have shown that it\u2019s difficult to reach a deal with the country. (Though it should be noted that the United States had a nuclear deal with Iran before Trump pulled the U.S. out of it during his first term.) Trump warned<\/a> Tehran that it \u201cmust make a deal\u201d or else \u201cbad things will happen\u201d and appeared to give Iran a deadline. \u201cWe may have to take it a step further, or we may not. Maybe we\u2019re going to make a deal. You are going to be finding out over the next, probably, 10 days,\u201d Trump said. Later, Trump told reporters<\/a> that Iran had a \u201cmaximum\u201d of 10 to 15 days to reach a deal.<\/p>\n For strikes to be avoided, Panikoff said, Iran would have to sign off on an \u201camazing\u201d deal in which it agrees to stop enrichment of uranium (or to keep it close to zero), while also addressing Washington\u2019s concerns on ballistic missiles and Tehran\u2019s support for proxy groups in the region.<\/p>\n \u201cI think there\u2019s zero chance of that happening, and we\u2019re edging closer to a conflict,\u201d Panikoff said.<\/p>\n Unclear goals.<\/strong> If the U.S. does attack, an expansive list of targets is likely to be on the table, Panikoff said, including command-and-control centers, ballistic missile production facilities, and nuclear sites. The U.S. would likely begin its assault by moving to cripple additional air defenses and ballistic missile launchers, to protect both U.S. assets and allies in the region. From there, it\u2019s possible that the U.S. could move to target the Iranian leadership\u2014but Trump\u2019s opaqueness on what the ultimate goal is makes it hard to predict.<\/p>\n Tricia McLaughlin, the spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security who was one of the top defenders of Trump\u2019s controversial immigration crackdown, is leaving the agency, she announced in a post<\/a> on X this week. McLaughlin will be replaced by Katie Zacharia<\/a>, a Fox News and Newsmax commentator.<\/p>\n That\u2019s not the only recent spokesperson shake-up within the U.S. government. Col. Dave Butler, a spokesperson and strategic communications advisor at the Department of Defense, was reportedly<\/a> forced out of the Pentagon at the behest of Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.<\/p>\n What should be high on your radar, if it isn\u2019t already.<\/em><\/p>\n Board of Peace meets.<\/strong> Trump convened the first meeting of his Board of Peace in Washington on Thursday, with dozens of foreign officials and members of the Trump administration in attendance to discuss the future of Gaza.<\/p>\n At the event, Trump announced<\/a> that nine members of the board have pledged to provide a total of $7 billion toward relief for the enclave and that the United States will contribute $10 billion, though he did not specify where that money will come from. In addition, five countries agreed to deploy troops to Gaza as part of an international stabilization force, with two others (Jordan and Egypt) committing to train police.<\/p>\n The Board of Peace, which was established on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in January this year, aims to promote peacekeeping around the world and will oversee the Gaza peace plan that Trump brokered last year. But more than half of the 60 countries Trump invited to join have thus far declined, including several key U.S. allies.<\/p>\n Trump tiptoes around Taiwan.<\/strong> Weeks after greenlighting the biggest-ever U.S. weapons sales package to Taiwan, Trump is slow-walking<\/a> further sales to the island under pressure from Chinese President Xi Jinping, the Wall Street Journal<\/em> reported.<\/p>\n Trump told reporters on Monday that he was \u201ctalking\u201d to Xi about further arms sales to Taiwan and would \u201cmake a determination pretty soon.\u201d Trump is scheduled to travel to Beijing in April to meet with Xi, saying<\/a> in a speech on Thursday that he hoped Xi would \u201cput on the biggest display you\u2019ve ever had in the history of China\u201d for the visit.<\/p>\n While the Trump administration has continued to support Taiwan over the past year, a narrative of the island as a \u201cstrategic liability\u201d has come to the surface among certain administration officials in Washington, Ryan Hass, a fellow and director of the China Center at the Brookings Institution and former China director on the National Security Council, wrote in a new report<\/a> on Wednesday. \u201cTo protect its interests, the United States must also update its own story about why Taiwan matters and what Washington aims to achieve in cross-Strait relations,\u201d he wrote, highlighting Taiwan\u2019s centrality to the U.S. AI boom and pouring cold water on the notion that conflict between China and Taiwan is inevitable.<\/p>\n