The article, penned by correspondent Paolo Mastrolilli for La Repubblica, delves into the recent negotiation breakdowns leading to President Trump's decision to take military action against Iran. Trump’s administration aimed for a complete dismantling of Iran's nuclear program, the cessation of missile developments, and a halt to destabilizing operations by Iranian-affiliated groups like Hezbollah. These military interventions were assessed against the backdrop of achieving a significant foreign policy victory, which could bolster Trump’s domestic political standing.

As the negotiations unraveled, Trump seemed to perceive an urgency that not only stemmed from the failure to secure a diplomatic resolution but also from a political calculus. The article indicates that a successful military strike would potentially unify his MAGA base, alleviating dissent within his own political party and paving the way for a stronger position heading into the upcoming elections. This suggests that Trump's military strategies are not solely based on foreign policy goals but are heavily intertwined with his electoral ambitions.

Ultimately, this situation places the U.S. in a complex international dilemma where military action could further entrench animosities in the Middle East, possibly leading to escalated conflicts. The pressures faced by the Trump administration highlight the delicate balance between domestic political strategy and the ramifications of foreign policy decisions, raising questions about how leadership decisions are influenced by electoral considerations in volatile geopolitical contexts.