Three Options Before Trump As Geneva Talks End Without Deal — Diplomacy, Limited Strikes Or War

The most dramatic option would involve a multi-wave military campaign aimed at crippling Iran's leadership structure.

Advertisement
Read Time: 4 mins
Trump's calculus now hinges on whether coercion strengthens diplomacy or makes conflict inevitable.
(Photo: X/@DonaldTrump)

As high-stake talks in Geneva ended without a breakthrough, US President Donald Trump faces a defining choice on Iran to double down on diplomacy, launch targeted military strikes, or pursue a sweeping campaign aimed at toppling Tehran's regime in what could become Washington's largest war since 2003.

After overseeing the most significant American military buildup in the Middle East since the Iraq War, Trump now has three clear — and increasingly stark — paths before him.

Advertisement

Option 1: Let Diplomacy Run Its Course

Indirect negotiations led by Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff have so far failed to bridge core disagreements. Washington insists Iran must end all uranium enrichment. Tehran maintains enrichment is a sovereign right and says its nuclear programme is strictly peaceful.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reiterated that “zero enrichment” is not negotiable, framing the programme as a matter of national pride and scientific achievement.

Advertisement

The ultimate decision on any agreement rests with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who has long rejected demands that Iran dismantle its enrichment capacity entirely.

Regional diplomats say creative compromises — such as permitting very low-level enrichment for medical purposes under strict monitoring — have been floated. But those ideas have surfaced before and failed.

Advertisement

Trump has publicly signalled he prefers a deal. “I would rather have a Deal than not,” he wrote on Truth Social, while warning that failure would be “a very bad day” for Iran. Yet with Geneva talks ending without an agreement, diplomatic momentum appears fragile.

Also Read: Geneva Talks: Uranium Enrichment Sovereign Right, Says Iran

Option 2: A Limited Strike To Force Concessions

Trump has confirmed he is considering targeted military action. A calibrated strike could focus on ballistic missile sites, facilities linked to Iran's nuclear programme, or infrastructure tied to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

With two aircraft carriers, dozens of warships and hundreds of aircraft positioned in the region including the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group the Pentagon has the operational capability to execute such strikes swiftly.

Supporters argue a limited show of force could pressure Tehran back to the table. Critics warn it may instead harden Iran's position and trigger retaliation against US bases across the Middle East.

Advertisement

Iran has previously responded to US strikes, though without causing American casualties. Officials caution that any escalation carries unpredictable risks.

Option 3: A Broader Campaign Targeting The Regime

The most dramatic option would involve a multi-wave military campaign aimed at crippling Iran's leadership structure and security apparatus potentially paving the way for regime change.

Such an operation would likely target assets linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, air defence systems, missile production facilities and key regime figures. Military planners have reportedly mapped out scenarios ranging from simultaneous strikes to extended air campaigns.

However, US defence officials have privately raised concerns about the scale and complexity of such an operation. A protracted conflict could strain American forces, deplete weapons stockpiles already supporting Israel and Ukraine, and risk direct confrontation across the region. Perhaps most critically, Washington lacks clarity on what would follow a regime collapse. There are no firm guarantees that military escalation would lead to stable political transition inside Iran.

Also Read: Mamdani's Surprise White House Visit: NYC Mayor To Meet Trump Amid Housing Talks

The Strategic Crossroads

Trump's calculus now hinges on whether coercion strengthens diplomacy or makes conflict inevitable. Some advisers argue Iran is weakened and this is a moment of strategic leverage. Others warn that miscalculation could entangle the US in its largest Middle East war since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. With Geneva yielding no deal, the decision shifts squarely to the Oval Office and could reshape regional security for years to come.

Essential Business Intelligence, Continuous LIVE TV, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.

Loading...