What the US election results mean for Trump's war with Iran

US President Donald Trump spent the final weeks of the US midterm election campaign predicting that the war with Iran would end "right after the election".

The votes have now been counted and his Republican Party is facing defeat in both houses of Congress, a defeat which the American vice president attributed to the conflict.

“The reason we lost was the war,” Vice President JD Vance said in a post on X on November 4. Trump said that assessment was “largely true,” but added that he would make the same decision again because “Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear weapons.”

This leaves Trump – almost two months before the Democratic-led Congress takes control of the budget and the committees' direction of calling witnesses – facing less favorable options: negotiation, escalation or taking no action.

“Democrats are not taking control today,” Shayan Samii, a U.S.-based national security expert, told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s Radio Farda. “Trump still has two months to act, unencumbered by the implications of the election result, if he wants to resume the military campaign.”

A president could justify military intervention by invoking national security concerns, Samii said. Any bill aimed at limiting war would require Trump's signature or a two-thirds majority in both chambers of Congress, the House of Representatives and the Senate, to override his veto.

"Some experts believe that the Democrats can change the course of the military confrontation with the Islamic Republic. I don't see it that way," he said.

Scenario 1: Full resumption of war

President Trump has repeatedly hinted that he may resume large-scale attacks after the election, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly pressuring him to do so.

A renewed military campaign is likely to follow the pattern of April, when US and Israeli strikes targeted bridges, rail lines and energy infrastructure, as Trump threatened to burn down "every power plant in Iran".

On the island of Harg, which is Iran's main terminal for oil exports, only military facilities have been hit so far. Striking the island's energy infrastructure is a step that Washington has not yet taken and has not had to take, as the blockade of Iranian ports has reduced Iranian oil exports to almost zero.

Shahin Modarres, an Iranian security expert based in Rome, expects this line to be crossed as well.

"Unfortunately, I see that a fierce war awaits us in the future," he told Radio Farda.

He explained that Washington has acted in several phases: first through deterrence and, after the failure of a memorandum of understanding in June – which he described as quite favorable to Tehran – followed by an economic campaign that included harsh sanctions, flight restrictions and partial closures of Iran’s land borders. Since this pressure has not yielded results, the next phase, he said, is to force Tehran to capitulate.

At this stage, Modarres said, “the country’s infrastructure, energy sector and economic sectors” will all be targets, along with what remains of Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, “particularly Pickaxe Mountain” – which is a fortified underground complex near Natanz that Trump has threatened to attack since July.

The goal would be to drive the country toward collapse until the Islamic Republic surrenders, allowing “a layer of this regime” – elements of the current leadership – to take control, “at least for a while.” Such a surrender, Modarres added, would significantly increase the likelihood that the system would collapse entirely.

But in recent weeks Tehran has warned of the consequences of a new conflict.

On October 31, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ordered commanders to prepare for an “immediate, effective and geographically limited response” to any new attack, as well as to expand the list of targets.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has also threatened to target undersea communication cables in the Persian Gulf, while warning that US bases outside the Middle East and energy infrastructure in the region will also be targeted.

Iran has hinted that unlike the 40-day war, during which Tehran expanded the conflict to a regional level, the next conflict would involve even more countries. The resumption of fighting would also cause even higher fuel prices.

Scenario 2: A big hit and then a pullback

Although unlikely, a middle path might appeal to a president who wants to achieve a victory without engaging in a long war.

Reports in late October claimed that the Trump administration had warned its allies in the region that a short and intense military operation against Iran was possible after the election.

One of the main targets could be Pickaxe Mountain. President Trump could then declare that Iran's nuclear program has been sufficiently damaged and aim to reach an agreement that would see the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for some sanctions relief and a postponement of nuclear talks.

Parts of the facility are believed to be 80 to 100 meters underground, making it difficult to verify any claims that it has been destroyed. Iran's military command, the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Command, has warned that bombing the mountain would constitute a resumption of war across the region.

Therefore, while the US may hope to wage a short military campaign, Iran may drag out the war in the hope that it will also increase the political and financial costs for Trump.

Scenario 3: No war, no peace

Trump could simply continue to maintain the current stance, carrying out "defensive" strikes, maintaining the naval blockade, and continuing the US Navy's escort of merchant ships through the Strait of Hormuz.

However, the status quo is unsustainable, and Iran's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, declared in late October that the country must emerge from a "neither war nor peace" situation.

Samii also said he doubts that partial measures, such as occasional attacks on military facilities on Iranian islands, can continue for a long time.

By mid-2027, he said, Washington's attention will be focused on the 2028 presidential race, and candidates from both parties will seek a long-term solution to Iran, rather than inheriting this problem.

Scenario 4: A temporary agreement

On the diplomatic front, there is a possibility of a limited agreement, brokered by Qatar, similar to the memorandum of understanding signed in June, which briefly stopped the fighting and lifted the blockade, but was later undone.

Markets appear to be pricing in such an agreement. On November 4, the price of Brent crude oil fell below $100 per barrel.

Iran has offered to reopen the Strait of Hormuz within two days if Washington meets its seven conditions, including lifting the naval blockade, easing sanctions, guaranteeing an end to attacks and a regional ceasefire that includes Lebanon.

A broader deal that would include Iran's nuclear program appears less likely. Washington wants a pledge that would verify that Iran will not rebuild the program, while Tehran says nuclear talks can only begin once its conditions are met.

Modarres argued that diplomacy and conflict escalation are not mutually exclusive.

He said that both Vance and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio are likely potential candidates for the 2028 presidential election, and that each wants to take credit for every success and blame the other for every failure. But, in essence, they are playing the role of “good cop, bad cop,” keeping “a door half-open” until the last moment, “even after the war starts,” so that Tehran still has a chance to surrender.

Factors that can disrupt scenarios

Several factors could disrupt any of these scenarios.

Israel may act alone if it assesses that Washington is moving toward an agreement that it opposes.

Inside Iran, the failure of the June memorandum of understanding was partly attributed to hardline factions leading attacks on merchant ships. This proves that a deal can be sabotaged just as easily by Tehran as by Washington.

Meanwhile, Tehran is already interpreting the results of the US midterm elections as confirmation of its stance. Before the vote, analysts argued that Iran believed it was winning the war. A landslide victory for the Democrats could encourage it to increase its demands and wait until the president, already weakened and with less room to maneuver, faces even greater difficulties.

And then there's Trump himself.

Asked on November 4 when the war with Iran would end, he gave the same answer as on October 27: "Whenever I want you to."/REL