At 4am Tehran time this morning, US President Donald Trump took to Truth Social to declare what appeared to be the conclusion — at least temporarily — of a spiralling and increasingly bizarre set of twists and turns in the Middle East conflict: a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Iran. In his usual performative bravado, President Trump announced that both parties had agreed to stop the escalation. The ceasefire, however fragile, follows a sequence of decisions and statements so erratic and contradictory that they could have only emerged from the theatre of American politics under Trump 2.0.
The Spark: Israel’s Strategic Gambit
What began as a unilateral surprise Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear facilities on June 13th occurred during ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Washington over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear programme. This calculated move by Tel Aviv blindsided not only the mullahs of Tehran but ostensibly the White House itself. President Trump, initially claiming ignorance of the Israeli operation, later shifted his position multiple times — first expressing disapproval, then promising to “wait two weeks,” only to unleash the full might of US strategic airpower within days.
According to Israeli officials, the goal was clear: decapitate Iran’s nuclear ambitions through a swift and targeted campaign. The offensive, launched in the early hours of June 13th, rapidly destroyed key Iranian military and scientific installations, assassinated top nuclear scientists and left Tehran scrambling to respond.
Trump’s ‘Two Week’ Doctrine and Sudden Retaliation
What followed from Washington was vintage Trump: chaos cloaked in confidence. After initially distancing himself from the Israeli action, Trump shocked allies and adversaries alike by authorising a massive US aerial bombardment of three Iranian nuclear sites. Deploying B-2 bombers armed with bunker-busting munitions and submarine-launched cruise missiles, the US strike escalated the conflict with brutal firepower, though what remains of Iran’s enrichment infrastructure and uranium stockpiles can only be guessed at.
Unsurprisingly, on June 23rd, Iran’s Parliamentary National Security Committee endorsed a ‘framework bill‘ to suspend cooperation with the IAEA, including halting inspections, camera installations and reporting — unless Iran’s nuclear sites are deemed secure. This has yet to be approved by Parliament and the President.
The US President’s calculus appears to have been part public relations, part military doctrine. With an eye on November and growing discontent among his MAGA base — figures such as Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon had already voiced concern that Trump had once again been ‘played’ by Netanyahu into an entangling foreign war — the President seems to have decided that a quick show of strength followed by a clean exit would be his best political lifeline. By declaring that the US strikes were a “spectacular success” that had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear sites, this provides the US President an off-ramp to the conflict on a high note.
Iran’s Performative Response and Netanyahu’s Calculated Messaging
Iran’s response was, in a word, theatrical. A volley of six missiles was fired toward a large US military base in Qatar — an act that may seem hostile on its face, but evidence quickly emerged that Tehran had given Doha advance notice. According to Bloomberg, “Iran’s missile attack on a US air base in Qatar was telegraphed well in advance, suggesting Tehran intended a symbolic show of force while offering a way to de-escalate after US airstrikes over the weekend.” Not a single missile struck a target. This tit-for-tat performance provided Iran with its performative retaliation while ensuring that the fall out with its Gulf Arab neighbour was contained.
Following Trump’s ceasefire announcement, the Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi said: “As Iran has repeatedly made clear, Israel launched war on Iran, not the other way around. … Provided that the Israeli regime stops its illegal aggression against the Iranian people no later than 4am Tehran time, we have no intention to continue our response afterwards.”
Jittery oil markets took this as a signal that escalation was unlikely. Brent and WTI crude prices plunged by more than 7% within hours of the tepid Iranian response. The drop reflected traders’ growing confidence that neither side sought to drag the region into a long war — at least for now. Indeed, for Tehran, the stakes could not be higher. Shuttering the Strait of Hormuz or selectively attacking tanker traffic, threats floated by regime hardliners, remains unlikely given the enormous economic and diplomatic costs on its Gulf neighbours and on its own oil exports. China, which imports over 40% of its oil from Gulf states and has close diplomatic and economic relations with Iran, would certainly be concerned with any disruption of oil flows out of the strait.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, having claimed that his objectives were “nearly met”, had shown interest in winding down the conflict. “We won’t pursue our actions beyond what is needed,” he said over the weekend, underscoring that Israel did not seek a war of attrition. The less than impressive performance of Israel’s ‘Iron Dome’ air defence system and daily videos of buildings destroyed by direct hits from Iranian missiles in Tel Aviv, Beersheba, Haifa and other cities over the past week increased the pressure on the Israeli Prime Minister to assure citizens already fatigued by the Gaza war.
Israel’s economy — already strained by the ongoing conflict with Hamas in Gaza — is buckling under wartime restrictions: airspace closures, shuttered schools, attacks on its major seaport at Haifa and halted business operations. A war of attrition would have favoured Iran – already under heavy US and EU sanctions – over Israel, the latter having an open, trade-oriented economy dependent on the free flow of goods, services and finance.
The Trump Theatre and a Temporary Pause in the Middle East’s Great Game
For President Trump, this morning’s ceasefire declaration – if it holds – serves as both a strategic win and a political reprieve. Gone are the bellicose threats of ‘fire and fury’. He can once again remind his MAGA base – and outspoken supporters such as Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon – that he is the one leader who ends wars rather than starts them. “Ceasefire achieved,” Trump posted. “Let’s keep it that way.”
In an article published yesterday, ex-CIA analyst Larry Johnson aptly noted that the entire sequence of fast-paced events resembles “Kabuki theatre on steroids” — a carefully choreographed pageant with each actor playing their role to maintain internal legitimacy and geopolitical posture. Israel’s strike had to be answered. The US had to project dominance. Iran had to save face. And Trump, ever the political showman, needed a victory that looked like peace — even if lasting peace may remain ephemeral.
The Israel-Iran conflict may be momentarily on ice, but the deeper game continues. Nuclear ambitions, strategic deterrence and energy geopolitics remain unresolved. This ceasefire may hold — or it may unravel within days. But for now, the world exhales.
And Donald Trump, ever the showman, gets to exit stage right — at least until the next act.
Post Script
In a Truth Social post this morning at 6.50 am EST, President Trump put out these words in caps:
ISRAEL. DO NOT DROP THOSE BOMBS. IF YOU DO IT IS A MAJOR VIOLATION. BRING YOUR PILOTS HOME, NOW! DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
In comments to the press, President Trump said ““When I say [ceasefire in] 12 hours you don’t go out in the first hour and DROP EVERYTHING YOU HAVE ON THEM. I am not happy with Israel going out this morning because of one rocket that was shot perhaps by mistake. It didn’t land. I am not happy about that.”
The extent of his displeasure was expressed in his use of intemperate language: “We basically have two countries that have been fighting so long and so hard that they don’t know what the f*ck they’re doing.”
Dr Tilak K. Doshi is the Daily Sceptic‘s Energy Editor. He is an economist, a member of the CO2 Coalition and a former contributor to Forbes. Follow him on Substack and X.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.