Last year, when the United States struck Iran's nuclear facilities, the Donald Trump administration touted it as one of its greatest military achievements. Then, the US Air Force's B-2 bombers dropped 14 of the world's largest bombs, striking two Iranian nuclear facilities.
Now, amid widespread protests sweeping Iran, Trump is again threatening to strike the country. CNN reports that analysts believe that the attack, in support of the protesters, should focus on a number of command centers and other facilities associated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Its associated Basij forces and Iranian police could also be targets.
However, the location of the command centers in densely populated areas means there is a risk of casualties among the civilian population that Trump is trying to support, analysts say. And killing civilians can backfire.
Hawaii-based analyst Carl Schuster, a former U.S. Navy captain, said that any attack that even accidentally injures civilians risks alienating “dissidents united only by their hatred of the regime.”
“The casualties make us look like a foreign power trying to suppress and dominate Iran, not a force for liberation,” he explained.
Peter Layton, a visiting fellow at the Griffith Asia Institute in Australia, also echoed the warning about possible civilian casualties. At the same time, he noted that Washington has different goals. Iran’s top leadership, in particular, may be vulnerable, but they have learned a thing or two from past U.S. attacks on the country.
Schuster also said that Iranian leaders have realized “the need to spread out and hide what’s important to them. We’ve shown we can hit anything we find.”
Leighton believes that strikes on the homes of regime leaders could send a signal. While the military value would be small, “it would be a really theatrical gesture on behalf of the protesters.”
Washington could also target the wallets of Iranian leaders.
“The leadership and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps have a number of commercial and profitable enterprises throughout the country. "They need to target specific targets that are financially meaningful to them as individuals and their families," Layton explains, noting that the Corps controls up to two-thirds of the country's GDP.
Although, as Schuster noted, there is some distance between the IRGC and Iran's top leadership:
“The goal is for the IRGC leadership and rank-and-file members to be more concerned with their own survival than the survival of the regime.“
What weapons could the US use in an attack on Iran?
Analysts believe that although B-2 bombers were used last time, other weapons in the US arsenal would be more suitable in a possible strike. For example, “Tomahawk“ missiles could be launched from naval aircraft carriers, which would minimize the risk of losses to the United States.
Another option is the use of JASSM cruise missiles, which have a range of up to 1,000 kilometers. They can be launched from a variety of carriers, including F-15, F-16 and F-35 fighters, B-1, B-2 and B-52 bombers, as well as the US Navy's F/A-18 fighter jets. The use of drones is also possible.
“It is unlikely that manned aircraft would drop short-range munitions or gravity bombs, as that would probably be considered too risky,“ said Layton.
According to him, whatever method the Trump administration chooses to strike Iran, it would be “dramatic“ and fast:
“The administration loves theater. That means dramatic, media-driven, high-profile events. The administration prefers short-term attacks that pose the least risk to the U.S. troops involved.“
The expert points to Iran's oil facilities in the Persian Gulf as the easiest and safest target. A strike against them could cause economic damage to Iran in the medium and long term.