Another very dangerous step by D. Trump closer to March 23, 2026 (part 2)

Forecast: "Iran - Interference of events and forecast of a broader spectrum in the near term" (published on March 6, 2026, link)

S. Dragan:

... By March 23, 2026, (D. Trump) will take another very dangerous step or make a very alarming decision. Which will further destabilize his position and status...

In the confirmation of March 22, the "another very dangerous step or very alarming decision" by D. Trump - the ultimatum to Iran, made on March 21, was already preliminarily analyzed.

Donald Trump demanded that Iran open the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours. After the deadline, he promised to bomb power plants, which would have brought the region to the brink of a full apocalypse.

Donald Trump unleashed an ultimatum during the fourth week of the war with Iran. It seems he got the idea from Cuba. The US President threatened to bring about a blackout in the enemy country by destroying local power plants.

- If Iran does not fully open the Strait of Hormuz without threats within 48 hours from this exact moment, the U.S. will strike and destroy their various power plants, starting with the largest one first, - Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Tehran, obviously, does not intend to unblock the Strait of Hormuz.

- If Iran's oil and energy infrastructure comes under attack from an enemy, all U.S. and regime energy, IT, and desalination facilities in the region will become targets, - responded the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps.

- If even the slightest strike is made against the energy infrastructure of the Islamic Republic, we will plunge the entire Middle East into darkness, create a blackout, and cut off the internet, - Iran's state news agency Mehr reported in turn.

Perhaps the most significant threat concerned desalination plants. Its implementation poses a catastrophe for 100 million desert region residents who rely on such facilities for their drinking water. Qatar gets 99% of its freshwater from the plants, Kuwait and Bahrain over 90%, Oman 86%, Saudi Arabia 70%, and Israel 75-80%. Iran also has desalination plants, but its dependency is significantly lower than its neighbors, giving Tehran a strategic advantage in case of further escalation.

- It's really a blow to the heart, and it's being delivered with immense force. These desalination plants are even more vulnerable for the Gulf countries than their energy infrastructure, Arab Institute for Gulf Studies expert in Washington Hussein Ibish noted in an interview with The Wall Street Journal.

An ultimatum is an action that requires a logical and forceful conclusion if the opposing side does not meet the demands.

The entire world held its breath, waiting to see what action Donald Trump would take on March 23, after the aforementioned 48 hours.

What happened was that, as a result of another impulsive move, Donald Trump "... further destabilized his position and standing...."

Again, "good intentions with poor execution": lots of words, declarations, and questionable, unsubstantiated claims of "American weaponry victories."

However, a day later, the US President suddenly reversed his words and spoke of productive peace talks. The politician remains true to his style, becoming increasingly predictable.

On March 23, US President Donald Trump announced that he had instructed the Pentagon to delay five days the planned strikes on Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure.

"I have directed the Department of Defense to delay any military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for a period of five days," he wrote on the social media platform Truth Social, according to RIA Novosti.

The American President noted that over the past two days, the US and Iran had held very positive and productive negotiations. According to him, the discussions were thorough, detailed, and constructive.

The White House spokesperson added that the negotiations aim for a full and final resolution of the disputes between the parties in the Middle East. He also stated that consultations will continue during the current week.

However, we must recall that the US President previously declared that the United States had no interest in dialogue with Iran, as the country "lacks leaders with whom to negotiate."

As mentioned earlier, he also threatened Iran with the destruction of its power plants over the Strait of Hormuz, demanding that it open the strait for safe navigation without conditions within 48 hours.

Let's emphasize and repeat, the apocalypse did not happen. Just one day later, on Monday, Donald Trump suddenly backed down, once again justifying the acronym TACO (Trump always chicken out - "Trump always chickens out").

- I am pleased to announce that over the past two days, very successful and productive negotiations have taken place between the United States of America and Iran regarding the full and final resolution of our hostile relations in the Middle East. In the spirit and tone of these deep, detailed, and constructive negotiations, which will continue throughout the week, I have directed the Department of Defense to delay any military strikes against Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure for five days, contingent on the success of the ongoing meetings and discussions, - Trump wrote on Truth Social.

It seems paradoxical at first glance that while dire threats were being made in the White House, conditions for a peace agreement with Iran were being worked out. According to Axios, the peace plan has been in the making for days with the direct involvement of Trump's key envoys, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. According to a source close to the publication, the conditions the Americans will insist on include the unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz, a long-term agreement on Iran's nuclear program and ballistic missiles, which Tehran will not be allowed to develop for five years, the abandonment of uranium enrichment, and the closure of nuclear reactors in Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordo.

Against the backdrop of statements about the complete defeat of the enemy, the destruction of its air defense systems, and an impending surrender, the conditions seem rather modest. Perhaps that is why Trump was so enraged by a recent New York Times article and unleashed another furious tirade.

- The United States has rubbed Iran off the map, but their useless analyst David Sanger says I haven't achieved my goals. I have, indeed, achieved them, several weeks ahead of schedule! Their leadership is destroyed, their navy and air force are dead, they have absolutely no defense, and they want to make a deal. But I won't! We are ahead of schedule by weeks, - the president wrote on social media.

However, in reality, the deadlines were missed. Initially, the war was expected to last three to four weeks, as Trump had previously stated, and was supposed to end by the end of March with a regime change. The change in plans is evident from the cancellation of the US president's visit to China. It was scheduled for March 31st.

- I would love to talk to China, but since there is a war, I have to be here, - Trump wrote in his usual style.

However, his posturing is unlikely to conceal the true state of affairs. Trump needed to quickly acquire "strong cards" or at least appear to have them, then offer a deal. This is a recognizable tactic from his first term, when the US president demonstrated it in negotiations with North Korea. That's why Washington started raising the stakes. The problem is that this bluff is clearly seen in Tehran, and the regime has proven to be far more resilient than American and Israeli strategists anticipated. In fact, they're laughing in Trump's face.

- Trump first threatened the European Union, then begged for help. Today he said: "If you don't come, we'll come and take Greenland." I want to tell the EU: if you can't protect your Greenland, ask us - we'll come and protect it for you," said Iranian police chief Ahmad-Reza Radan before Trump's ultimatum was withdrawn.

"Hey, Trump, you're fired! You know that phrase. Thanks for listening," Iran's official KSIR spokesperson Ibrahim Zolfagari addressed the American president.

In other words, the US president was openly ridiculed even before he revealed his cards. The issue is that Tehran may not be ready for such a deal that Donald Trump would not be ashamed to show to the public.

It seems that the European diplomat Kay Keyllas was not far from the truth with her aphorism about love.

- Starting a war is like a love story. It's easy to get sucked into, but hard to get out of, - Politico quotes Keyllas, who later took a lot of flak for these words.

However, in China, as in Iran, they know the American president well. Literally just before the sharp escalation and ultimatum, Professor Din Lun of the Shanghai University of Foreign Languages' Middle East Institute predicted that things were heading towards peaceful negotiations.

- The war has reached a stalemate. Both sides threaten to take extreme measures, but this also shows that neither can achieve a decisive victory. In the end, the conflict will have to be resolved through negotiations, - said Din Lun.

Israel's attempts to drag the monarchies of the Persian Gulf into the war have failed.

The Al-Arabia channel calculated that over 85% of all missiles, shells, and drones launched by Iran are directed towards Arab countries, with only 15% attributed to the attacking Israel. So far, 39 oil refineries, gas fields, and other sites have been damaged in nine countries in the Middle East. Arab monarchies are already suffering losses that will take years to recover from. In this context, they threatened Tehran with retaliatory strikes for the last time, calling it their "final warning." For some reason, they decided to convey this message through Turkey, perhaps thinking it would sound more menacing.

- Arab countries in the Persian Gulf say that if the current situation of strikes continues, they will be forced to take measures in response. At their latest meeting in Riyadh, they issued their final warning on this matter, said Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan on Sunday.

The irony of the situation is that in the early days of the war, the threats from Arab countries sounded much harsher, and now increasingly resemble outbursts of despair. The fattened monarchies are trying their best to avoid entering into an armed conflict, aiming to minimize damage to their own economies.

Against this backdrop, there are growing signs of frustration towards the United States in the Gulf countries. In this regard, the recent appearance of Omani journalist Salem bin Hamad Al Jahuri on BBC Arabic is illustrative. He claimed that the US demanded $5 trillion from Arab monarchies to continue the fight against Iran. And if the Arabs prefer de-escalation and an end to the war, Trump, according to Al Jahuri, demands $2.5 trillion in reparations.

It sounds amusing considering that the $5 trillion sum is twice the combined pre-war annual GDP of all Arab monarchies put together. However, such statements could indicate a shift in sentiment in the region and a corresponding manipulation of public opinion.

Could the Americans launch a last-ditch ground operation?

In recent days, American media have been increasingly discussing Washington's preparations for a land operation. According to CBS, military leaders have already thoroughly worked out various scenarios for deploying units of the 82nd Airborne Division, forces for rapid response, and the Marine Corps expeditionary corps. Even issues of housing Iranian prisoners were discussed at the Pentagon.

In the near future, 2500 Marines from the 31st Expeditionary Corps are expected to reach the shores of Iran. They are traveling from southeastern U.S. on the amphibious ship USS Tripoli at the highest possible speed and without stops. And another landing group left from the western coast of the U.S. several days ago. It includes the ships USS Boxer, USS Portland, and USS Comstock, another 2500 Marines, amphibious vehicles, missiles, and F-35 fighter jets.

The size of the units being deployed indicates that a full-scale conquest of Iran is not being planned. A limited operation is being prepared. Among military experts, three different scenarios are being discussed: capturing and clearing the coast to protect the Strait of Hormuz, landing on the island of Harq, through which Iran exports 90% of its oil, and storming the nuclear facility in Isfahan and subsequently removing Iran's enriched uranium reserves.

According to retired U.S. General Joseph Votel, a battalion of marine infantry, around 800-1000 personnel, would be sufficient to capture Harq. The general believes that the contingent could be deployed by sea or air.

- The only comment regarding Harq: I'm not sure there's a point in stationing troops there. It's only 20 miles from the Iranian coast. So you'd definitely be under their weapons systems' threat. You'd be very, very vulnerable there, - Votel stated in an interview with The War Zone.

Capturing nuclear facilities in Natanz or Isfahan, according to the general, would represent a much larger-scale operation.

- This would require not only the involvement of special forces, but also significant support forces - brigade-level, from 1,000 to 3,000 or 4,000 troops, to ensure security during the operations, - believes Vautel.

The general emphasizes that the operation to remove 450 kilograms of enriched uranium to 60% - is a very complex operation with dangerous material.

- This is not a task that can be solved overnight. It will take time, - Vautel notes.

Open preparations for ground operations with controlled "leaks" in the media may be part of the same tactics Donald Trump described in his early book "The Art of the Deal". However, it's still too early to rule out the possibility of limited operations. They fit into the logic of world politics like a card game. Control of the Hark island is what Trump calls a "strong card", while the destroyed school with 170 little girls is a "blitz". But in a losing position, it's better to drop the cards than to raise the stakes and increase future irreversible losses.

Will the consequences of the American President's ultimatum of March 21 and its subsequent "retractions" on March 23 be critical for the American President? It's hard to say, but S. Dragans warns:

...It will further destabilize his (D. Trump's) position and status... Likely, this step will bring significant problems with his initiatives and opportunities, as well as create personal financial strain with the threat of losses...

As noted, since March 23, many anti-Trump media outlets have made millions of dollars "off the ultimatum's cancellation." How close these "lucky ones" are to D. Trump remains to be seen.

(Part 3 of the topic continues)