President Donald Trump and Iran’s leaders are preparing for the possibility of renewed military confrontation after the November 3 US midterm elections, while continuing to pursue a diplomatic resolution to the conflict, according to an assessment by the Soufan Center. Both sides are increasing their readiness for escalation as negotiations struggle to reconcile their central objectives, with Washington expanding its military presence in the region and Tehran warning that any new US attack would provoke a stronger response.
For Iran, the immediate priority is breaking the US naval blockade of its ports, which has severely restricted its oil exports and placed further pressure on an economy that senior officials acknowledge is in crisis. Tehran also wants to deter Trump and future US administrations from launching further attacks against the Islamic Republic. Washington, meanwhile, seeks the restoration of unrestricted commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz and verifiable Iranian commitments to strict limits on its nuclear programme. Neither side has identified a diplomatic formula capable of satisfying these demands.
The severity of Iran’s economic difficulties was acknowledged on Saturday by Major General Mohsen Rezaei, the hardline Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) figure who heads Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. At a high-level government meeting focused on economic stabilisation, Rezaei warned that the country was experiencing one of its most difficult periods since the 1979 Islamic revolution. His admission was particularly significant given his previous command of the IRGC during the 1980–88 Iran-Iraq war and his recent threats of massive retaliation if Washington resumed combat operations. On Sunday, as the remaining Iranian oil supplies available for export were exhausted, Oil Minister Mohsen Paknejad stepped down for “personal reasons”, according to Iranian state media.
The economic pressure has not, however, persuaded Tehran to abandon its negotiating position. The US naval operation has helped restore oil shipments from Gulf states and Iraq to nearly pre-war levels, while Iranian exports remain blocked. The mission, which involves guiding and protecting commercial oil and gas traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, has achieved substantial results without requiring large-scale lethal force against Iran. But the restrictions have not produced the political concessions Washington seeks, leaving Trump increasingly frustrated with the absence of a war-ending agreement.
Trump has openly threatened to resume major combat operations. Last week, he said: “Now I have to make a decision: either Iran signs the deal, or it won’t exist any longer.” Senior US officials met him at the presidential retreat at Camp David on Friday to discuss the conflict and the escalating fighting in Yemen between the Iran-backed Houthi movement, also known as Ansarallah, and forces of the Saudi-backed Presidential Leadership Council (PLC), which controls southern Yemen.
Saudi leaders have asked Trump to authorise airstrikes against the Houthis, but he has so far declined and remains inclined against the proposal, although US officials say his position could change. Such strikes would be intended to strengthen Saudi Arabia’s defence while weakening Tehran’s remaining regional partners. The Houthis could become a more immediate concern if they seized Aden, the PLC’s capital, and the rest of southern Yemen, a development that would present a severe crisis for Saudi Arabia and US interests.
A direct ground operation inside Iran remains an option under consideration, although it is not Trump’s preferred course. Some people close to senior US policy circles believe he is considering limited missions to destroy or seize Iranian missile arsenals and nuclear installations if diplomacy fails. The risks of deploying ground forces remain substantial, and Trump has repeatedly said since the conflict began that a ground offensive is “not needed”. A separate intervention against the Houthis is also possible if the PLC’s position deteriorates severely.
The scale of the US military build-up would give the president additional options. The USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier strike group is heading to the region to join the USS George H.W. Bush and the USS George Washington. Its arrival would bring three carrier strike groups into the Middle East by the end of October, although the period during which all three operate there may be brief. The Navy previously deployed three carrier strike groups to the region in April, the first such concentration since 2003, when the war against Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq was launched.
Together, the three groups would bring more than 20,000 sailors and Marines afloat, supported by hundreds of aircraft. They would reinforce nearly 40,000 US military personnel still deployed at damaged but operational bases in the Gulf states and other facilities across the region. The Roosevelt is carrying more than 7,000 sailors and 2,000 Marines, the latter aboard the USS Makin Island amphibious readiness group. That group includes a dozen F-35 stealth fighter jets, infantry fighting vehicles, transport helicopters, armoured personnel carriers and amphibious vehicles. Combined with the USS Boxer amphibious readiness group already in the region, the force could seize a beachhead on the Iranian coast or occupy specific military facilities if Trump ordered ground forces into action.
US advisers have warned that Iran would probably attempt to pre-empt or retaliate against any renewed American escalation. Missile and drone attacks by Iran and aligned forces, including the Houthis and Shia militias in Iraq, could target energy infrastructure in Arab Gulf states, disrupting global energy supplies and financial markets. Over the past month, the Houthis have already targeted Saudi refineries, the kingdom’s crucial East-West pipeline and airports during their conflict with Saudi Arabia and Saudi-backed PLC forces.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reinforced Tehran’s warning on Sunday, telling foreign ambassadors in Tehran: “If our enemies again choose the path of military confrontation, our response will be stronger than before, and we will defend ourselves with even more force … There is no military solution, nor any solution based on new sanctions … only negotiations based on justice and fairness” could end the conflict. On Tuesday, the IRGC declared through the state-backed Fars news agency that southern maritime transit routes through the Strait of Hormuz, currently protected by the US Navy, would soon be “blocked”.
According to the Soufan Center, these threats reflect a broader change in Iran’s military doctrine following its failure to deter US and Israeli attacks in 2025 and 2026. Tehran has moved away from the strategic patience and restraint that characterised much of its pre-war approach towards a strategy of counter-escalation intended to reshape the region’s security and economic order. Early last month, parliament Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf declared that “the era of ‘proportionate responses’ is over”, warning that violations of Iran’s interests and security would receive a “faster, heavier, and more painful response”.
For Washington, the remaining uncertainties concern how much of Iran’s missile and drone arsenal remains available for retaliation and whether US stocks of defensive munitions are sufficient to limit the damage. Those questions will shape the risks facing the administration as it weighs renewed military action against the prospect of a negotiated settlement.
