US Threats and Military Feasibility
The deadline set by President Donald Trump for Iran to reach a deal is approaching, with a threat to destroy much of Iran's civilian infrastructure if no agreement is made by Tuesday evening in the US. However, military experts and analysts have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of such threats being executed in a single operation, according to a BBC report. They also caution that even a large-scale attack is unlikely to compel the Iranian regime to quickly agree to a ceasefire.
On Monday, Trump vowed to destroy "every bridge" and power station in Iran within four hours if no deal was reached by 20:00 EST (00:00 GMT Wednesday). He intensified his rhetoric on Tuesday morning, warning that "a whole civilization will die" if Iran failed to meet his deadline.
These statements represent an unprecedented threat from a US president. Experts on international law have noted that targeting civilian infrastructure could constitute a war crime. Despite this, Trump dismissed such concerns during a press conference on Monday.
Former US defense officials and analysts have pointed out the logistical challenges of destroying every bridge in a country as large as Iran within a few hours. Iran is roughly one-third the size of the continental United States. While the US has precise knowledge of Iran's main nuclear facilities and some key infrastructure, it likely cannot identify and destroy thousands of other targets across the country in such a short timeframe.
"To meet this threat literally would be an absolute herculean task. And would it have the desired strategic effect?" said a former senior US defense official who requested anonymity. "Trump is almost struggling to come up with a new level or threat that he can say with words that will move the strategic needle more in favour of the US here."
Potential Targets and Strategic Impact
Experts suggest that a large-scale attack on Iran's power sector is more feasible than destroying every bridge. Most of Iran's power plants and refineries are concentrated in three coastal provinces—Bushehr, Khuzestan, and Hormozgan—along the Persian Gulf. Striking these power plants could significantly impact the Iranian regime, according to Miad Maleki, a former senior US Treasury official who led sanctions against Iran.
"You do anything to those three provinces, you cut the regime's access to oil revenue [and] its access to the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz," said Maleki, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracy.
Diplomatic Developments and Calls for Extension
On Tuesday afternoon, Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif urged President Trump to extend the deadline by two weeks to allow more time for negotiations. Sharif posted on X:
"To allow diplomacy to run its course, I earnestly request President Trump to extend the deadline for two weeks. Pakistan, in all sincerity, requests the Iranian brothers to open Strait of Hormuz for a corresponding period of two weeks as a goodwill gesture."
Pakistan has become a key intermediary between the US and Iran, with Islamabad proposed as a potential venue for high-level talks if the parties approach a ceasefire agreement.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News that Trump had "been made aware of the proposal" from Pakistan's prime minister and that the US would respond soon. Trump also told Fox News on Tuesday that the US and Iran were engaged in "heated negotiations."
Recent Military Actions and Statements
Earlier on Tuesday, Vice-President JD Vance confirmed that the US conducted airstrikes on military targets on Kharg Island, a strategic island in the Persian Gulf responsible for handling approximately 90% of Iran's oil exports.
Speaking to reporters in Budapest, Vance stated that these strikes did not signal a change in Trump's strategy. He emphasized that negotiations would continue until the deadline but warned that the US could impose "much greater pain" on Iran's economy.
"So they've got to know, we've got tools in our toolkit that we so far haven't decided to use. The president of the United States can decide to use them, and he will decide to use them, if the Iranians don't change their course of conduct."
The White House dismissed interpretations of Vance's comments as indicating any US nuclear strike against Iran.
Some civilian infrastructure has already been targeted. Iran's state media reported on Tuesday that US-Israeli airstrikes hit a bridge in the city of Qom. Last week, Trump stated that the US bombed Iran's largest bridge.
Negotiations and Challenges
It remains uncertain whether the new wave of attacks threatened by Trump would be sufficient to bring Tehran to the negotiating table. US and Iranian officials reportedly engaged in direct talks on Tuesday after weeks of indirect discussions failed to advance a deal. Nevertheless, significant differences persist regarding Iran's oil sector, nuclear program, and control of the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump indicated on Monday that his special envoy Steve Witkoff, son-in-law Jared Kushner, and Vice-President JD Vance were leading the negotiations. However, a US official speaking anonymously clarified that Witkoff and Kushner manage day-to-day efforts, with Vance involved only if a deal appears imminent.
"The Vice-President may be tagged in more directly if there's sufficient progress made by Witkoff and Jared," the official said.
Impact on Iranian Population and Strategic Considerations
Trump may be relying on the assumption that the Iranian population will pressure the regime to negotiate if widespread power outages occur due to attacks on the power grid. However, Maleki noted that Iranians were already experiencing power outages before the conflict began in late February.
"This is not a wartime issue," he said. "The Iranian people are already dealing with a completely dysfunctional energy and power sector."
Moreover, attacking Iran's power infrastructure could complicate Trump's efforts to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has largely halted oil tanker traffic through the waterway, disrupting the global oil market and causing price increases.
Jason Campbell, a former Department of Defense official under Presidents Joe Biden and Trump, stated that Trump has not made a compelling case that escalating the conflict will achieve US objectives.
Nearly six weeks into the war, the Iranian regime has demonstrated a high tolerance for hardship and is unlikely to yield to US demands easily, Campbell, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, said.
For Iran's leadership, Campbell said, the war "is an existential fight not just for the country but for the regime."
