Donald Trump went to war with Iran pursuing regime change.
Instead, Iran pulled off regime change in the US.
This irony has been widely observed. But after the electoral massacre of the Republican Party, it’s worth debating how Iran’s strategic victory in war - and US defeat - may have saved US democracy.
There are two caveats here. Firstly, US democracy was already heavily compromised given the vast influence of wealthy and corporate interests.
Secondly, the far-right menace isn’t over yet, even though it has suffered a colossal setback. Trump’s appointment of far-right aide Stephen Miller as his new chief of staff shows the President has decided on an aggressive response to his election defeat - as does ordering the Justice Department to investigate Democrats threatening investigations or impeachment.
But it’s worth just considering what would have happened without what one expert argued in Foreign Policy was a bigger strategic defeat than Vietnam.
Trump 2.0 is substantively different from the first term. The Administration elected in 2016 essentially made a pact with the Republican Establishment to enact a traditional conservative agenda of tax cuts and deregulation, while Trump could rant and rave on Twitter.
Trump’s second incarnation is far more extreme, and he’s surrounded by far more committed ideologues. He unleashed an unprecedented authoritarian assault on a the already flawed US democracy.
According to an investigation by Reuters a year ago, at least 470 people, organisations and institutions were targeted in the first 10 months of his presidency.
Thousands of National Guard troops were dispatched to Democratic-run cities such as Los Angeles, Washington DC and Chicago. The Administration sought to change election rules in its favour. The Department of Justice was used to harass opponents and critics. Neutral civil servants were sacked in favour of politicised loyalists.
Congress was sidelined, and power concentrated in the executive. Public broadcasters were defunded, and vexatious lawsuits filed against media organisations. The Administration promoted the takeover of media organisations by the Ellisons, a pro-Trump family. Court orders were ignored.
Universities were harassed with investigations, threats to cut off funding and huge fines. Students were arrested and detained for protesting Israel’s genocide - or faced deportation.
As the political scientists Steven Levitsky and Lucan A. Way concluded last month: “The United States crossed the line into competitive authoritarianism during Donald Trump’s second presidency.”
But the Iran war seriously destabilised the consolidation of this authoritarian project.
The illegal attack was itself an example of unchecked presidential power. Trump launched the war without seeking authorisation from Congress. This was the first war in US history in which a clear majority was opposed from the start, and crucially six in ten voters back in March believed congressional authority should have been secured.
According to reporting by Reuters, Trump had sought briefings on how attacking Iran might project strength at home. Indeed, the sheer hubris was exposed by the total failure by the US government to soften up public opinion in support of the war. Remember how much effort George W. Bush’s crew put into building consent and acquiescence? Trump’s regime clearly felt the war would be such a walkover that they need not bother.
The President’s team clearly believed that the decline of US power abroad could be reversed with brute force - but they also hoped it would help consolidate their authoritarian project domestically.
Instead, of course, the war became a strategic catastrophe for the US. The Iranian regime did not just survive, but became even more hardline. It achieved control of the crucial Strait of Hormuz, a bigger strategic asset than having a nuclear bomb. It inflicted severe damage on US military bases as well as against the US’s Gulf allies.
A major reason for Trump’s victory was the squeeze in incomes under his predecessor Joe Biden. Because of the Iran war, the price of petrol surged by over 41%. Inflation more broadly jumped. All of this played a major role in the rout suffered by the Republicans, with six in ten believing the war was the wrong decision.
With Democratic control of Congress from January 2027, the opposition can now chair investigative committees, cal hearings, and examine the Administration’s attacks on democratic norms.
Democrats winning governorships and state legislative houses means they can reverse attempts to manipulate elections. Indeed, the party won secretary of state elections in the key battleground states of Ohio, Georgia and Indiana, handing them charge of administering elections.
And indeed if Trump launched this war in part to cement his authority at home - it has done the exact opposite. His humiliation undermines any incentive to obey his political project. Any sense of invincibility has been shredded. That is a fatal weakness for any aspiring autocrat.
Trump launched a war to overthrow Iran’s rulers and cement his own strength. Instead the war destroyed his political dominance and opened up the possibility to drive back Trumpian authoritarianism.
It’s up to the Democrats whether that opportunity is seized.
The US was not designed as a democracy and has never been one. Just look at its constitution. Voting has never changed much of anything, and if the “wrong” people are elected they are assassinated. The US is and has always been an oligarchy composed of white male businessmen. Wake up.
The Apprentice Trump 2.0 unleashed. Giving American plutocratic-oligarchy a bad name. No guile, no artifice, just hubris, thin skinned narcissism on stilts, insatiable greed. Surrounded by hand picked reliable sycophants to reinforce delusional overreach. Corrupting sense of power. A flawed character in very flawed democracy swayed by fellow traveler Netanyahu / Israel to wage illegal unprovoked war on Iran. Iran his/their nemesis. Cornered, and vengeful Trump will lash out in predictable authoritarian ways. What is unpredictable, big question mark, is how much 'victorious' Democrats , historically, Democrat Party grandee vested interests no different to those across aisle, fulfill mandate to change status quo.