TEHRAN – Analysts suggest that Donald Trump's promises to prioritize the concerns of the American people and end U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts were key factors in his return to the office. However, his purported pursuit of domestic recovery and diplomacy may be jeopardized by individuals within his own inner circle.

As he began to once again occupy the White House in January, Trump purged his administration of numerous individuals he felt had not served him during his first term, including prominent figures like Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton. But his replacements –Marco Rubio and Michael Waltz – are equally, if not more, inclined to advocate for policies that could lead to costly and destructive conflicts.

The U.S. says it has three main rivals in the world: China, Russia, and Iran. So far, Trump has taken the confrontational path with Beijing and began a tariff war with the world’s second-biggest economy, broke with the traditional American stance on Moscow and sought peace with Vladimir Putin, and left his initial intransigence on the content of a deal with Iran, engaging in new negotiations on Tehran’s nuclear program. These new indirect discussions only address Iran’s nuclear activities. Trump pulled out of a nuclear agreement signed in 2015 during his first term because he believed it should also include limitations on Iran’s military and foreign policy. It is believed that Pompeo and Bolton had a central role in the creation of this conviction of the president.

Sources have told the Tehran Times that Rubio and Waltz are actively working to derail the talks with Iran, which are nearing a third round. They believe that instead of pursuing dialogue and a potential diplomatic solution, America should immediately move towards a war with Tehran, attack its nuclear sites, and possibly its oil refineries. 

Their efforts to crimp diplomacy are mainly focused on disparaging the current group of American negotiators and casting doubt on Tehran’s intentions and official positions, which have shown no signs of inconsistency over the past decade. 

In their endeavors, the two top officials are also getting rid of any lower-ranked figure that objects to their warmongering. Dan Caldwell, a Marine Corps veteran advising the Secretary of Defense until recently, says he was fired from his position because he was opposed to a war with Iran. He claims he was not responsible for leaks that were used as a justification for his purge.

“A war with Iran risks being incredibly costly in terms of lives and dollars, and instability in the Middle East,” Caldwell told a prominent American reporter during an interview. “So, you could see catastrophe both in the form of a global depression, potentially, and the deaths of a lot of Americans in that region and here in the wake of a war with Iran.”

Iran has said that in case of any attacks on its interests, it would deliver a devastating response. Back in March, the Tehran Times was told that the country’s armed forces had loaded their missiles onto launchers. 

“Figures like Rubio and Waltz work more for the interests of Israel than the United States. They have extremely deep ties with Zionists and AIPAC. It was even revealed recently that Waltz used to work directly for Israel’s military,” said Mohammad Mehdi Abbasi, an expert on North American affairs. The two officials want Washington to fight a war for Israel, which would have devastating consequences for both the United States and the world, he added. 

"For now, the hardline and hawkish faction within Trump's administration, known for their bellicose rhetoric, has not succeeded in persuading Trump to initiate a war with Iran," the expert stated. "However, there is no guarantee that this will remain the case."

During the president’s first term, Pompeo persuaded him to assassinate top Iranian military general Qassem Soleimani, a move that resulted in the first attack on an American base since WWII, and caused dozens of American soldiers stationed in Iraq to become “brain-dead”, according to U.S. media reports. The assassination also failed to impact Iran’s ties with regional Resistance forces in any meaningful way. 

While taking his oath this January, Trump said he was planning to become the president of “peace”. But that may largely depend on whether he would be able to change course this time around.