Trump extends his ultimatum to Iran after recording his worst approval rating and facing a new rise in oil

These statements seemed inconsistent with the fifteen-point draft that the negotiator Steve Witkoff He claimed to have introduced the Iranian leaders through the mediation of Pakistan.

It was strange that someone was “begging” for an agreement and had to convince you that they deserved it, but you were the one who proposed it to them and through third parties.

However, despite Trump’s insistence, which has forced Israel to remove the Foreign Minister from its list of objectives, Abás Araqchinegotiator in Geneva, the positions appear to be exactly where they were on Monday.

There is no public record that Israel’s assassination of several leaders of the Revolutionary Guard, including the head of the Iranian Navy and responsible for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, Alireza Tangsirihas influenced Tehran’s willingness to reach an agreement on the terms demanded by Trump.

In fact, in what could be considered a low blow, the regime conveyed to Pakistan its willingness to negotiate directly with the vice president. J.D. Vanceand not with Witkoff or Jared Kushnerthe president’s son-in-law.

It is known that Vance has practically disappeared since February 28 and that he has always maintained an isolationist position, opposed to any intervention abroad, even less so if there is a presence of US troops there.

The deployment of two amphibious units of the Marine Corps, with some 5,000 soldiers prepared for the assault of different Gulf islands, among them, according to the digital AxiosJark, Larek and Abu Musa, all of them key to the control of Hormuz, plus the sending of some 1,000 paratroopers suggest that the possibility of a ground attack remains open.

Iran has never considered another option, in fact, considering the announcement of negotiations a maneuver by the White House to buy time and calm the markets.

Oil goes up, Trump goes down

This Thursday, as time passed and the end of the ultimatum approached, both these markets and American public opinion began to stir.

The barrel of Brent once again touched $110 at some points during the day, although its price fell again after the president’s announcement.

Now, when the war started, it was at $73 and it has been above $100 for thirteen of the last fourteen days, something not seen since the start of the Ukrainian war.

In this same time, the Dow Jones index has fallen seven points.

Uncertainty and unease are also reflected in the control surveys regularly published by the American media.

Trump, who began his second stay in the White House with 52% approval and 40% rejection—even above his electoral numbers—is now with the worst numbers of any president at this point in his term: 40.1% approval and 56.7% rejection, that is, a net balance of -16.6 percentage points.

Beyond the distrust that the war itself causes among the electorate, what is most frightening are its consequences on the economy.

According to the weighted average of statistician surveys Nate Silveronly 31.5% of Americans approve of Trump’s management of inflation, while 64.2% reject it.

It must be taken into account that the fight against inflation was one of Trump’s battlehorses in the 2024 elections and that everything indicates that it could skyrocket as soon as the consequences on the price of energy and fertilizers begin to be noticed.

With these numbers, it is practically impossible to think that the Republican Party can maintain any chance of retaining control of the Senate or the House of Representatives.

These are figures that point to the electoral disaster in the midtermshence MAGA movement figures such as Steve Bannon They are already asking for the deployment of ICE men at the polling stations, presumably as an intimidating measure that could alter the result.

NATO, on the wire

Bannon, precisely, is among the most critical of Trump’s international management throughout this term.

He is not the only one within the Republican Party, starting with the aforementioned Vance.

This type of interventionism in the Middle East and the mobilization of troops is reminiscent of the decisions made by George H. W. Bush and his son George W. Bush regarding Iraq.

It must be remembered that MAGA members often cite these two presidents as “the worst in American history.”

Trump could find himself in a kind of impasse if, as it seems, Iran continues to refuse to open the Strait of Hormuz and continues its attacks – increasingly sporadic, but more precise – against Israel and neighboring Arab countries.

He knows that he cannot simply leave and leave things bogged down, with another Khamenei as supreme leader, with Masud Pezeshkian still as president and with a good part of the regime intact and crying out for revenge.

On the other hand, the use of force can lead to numerous casualties. Iran has placed mines on Jark Island and reinforced its troops in anticipation of an invasion attempt.

In itself, that shouldn’t be much of a problem for the vastly superior US military and its elite troops. The problem, as always, comes later. How do you defend Jark, Larek, Abu Musa or the coast facing the Gulf without facing terrorist attacks and constant drone and missile launches?

Hence Trump’s enormous anger with his NATO partners, whom he again accused on Thursday of having let him down: “We protect them from Russia, but they don’t want to help us.”

Once again, we are facing a falsehood: the Trump Administration has not only left Ukraine to its fate, but has always seemed to work for the economic and political rehabilitation of Vladimir Putin.

Nor does the president remember that European countries supported the United States in Afghanistan as they did in Iraq, putting the blood of their young people at the disposal of Washington to sustain its wars.