How Will the Iran War End? Even Trump May Not Really Know | The Walrus

"It's about nuclear weapons (the same ones that were "obliterated" last year). It's about fundamental regime change (and yet the "Venezuela solution" would also be just fine). There was an imminent threat of attack against the US (which no intelligence agency was able to pick up, and which a recent high-level resignation from the administration has publicly claimed never existed)—or Trump just had a "gut feeling" that it was time to do this."

"Trump supporters regard all of this as a sophisticated strategy designed to keep opponents off-guard. Sometimes called "the weave," it is held to be a process of veering between different courses to keep opponents guessing and maintain maximum options until the last minute."

"A large part of this strategy is reducing the number of people and power centres involved in the ultimate decision down to a few trusted individuals who report directly to Trump, thus keeping everyone else in the dark. There is a reason why the entire diplomatic apparatus of the US has been sidelined in the search for peace in the major conflicts of the day."

Trump has offered multiple, often contradictory rationales for military action against Iran, including nuclear weapons concerns, regime change objectives, claims of imminent threats, Israeli pressure, and varying timelines for conflict duration. Supporters characterize this inconsistency as deliberate strategy—termed "the weave"—designed to maintain unpredictability and preserve maximum options. The administration has centralized decision-making among a small circle of trusted advisors, including the president's son-in-law and a real estate developer, while sidelining traditional diplomatic channels in major conflicts including Ukraine, Gaza, and Iran. Critics question whether this approach, potentially effective in real estate, translates appropriately to complex geopolitical situations.

Read at The Walrus