Trump eyes ‘Venezuela’ model for Iran, says military strike could last weeks

In the shadow of an increasingly volatile Middle East, Donald Trump has unveiled a stark vision of a conflict that shows no signs of swift resolution. Speaking in a brief telephone interview with The New York Times, Trump painted a picture of sustained military engagement with Iran — one that could stretch on for “four to five weeks” if circumstances demand, underscoring Washington’s readiness to press its assault with unflagging intensity.

With measured words that belie the tumult of the battlefields, the US president spoke of America’s seemingly inexhaustible arsenal and the determination to maintain pressure alongside Israel. “It won’t be difficult,” he reassured, describing vast stockpiles of ammunition poised across the globe to fuel a campaign he believes will eventually bend Iran to its strategic aims.

Yet, even as Trump spoke of logistical readiness, he did not shy away from the human cost of conflict. Acknowledging that American lives have already been lost and that more casualties may lie ahead, his remarks carried the sombre weight of war’s inevitable toll — an inevitability he accepted with grave solemnity.

Beyond the cadence of combat, Trump offered a kaleidoscope of possible futures for Iran’s fractured leadership. Echoing past interventions, he invoked a Venezuela-style blueprint — a scenario where only the topmost leader falls while the wider state structure endures, repurposed for cooperation rather than confrontation. Asked who might lead Iran after the seismic upheaval, Trump hinted at multiple possibilities but kept them shrouded in mystery, saying only that he had “three very good choices”.

He even floated a more dramatic alternative: that the Iranian people themselves might rise and cast aside an old regime. “That’s going to be up to them,” he mused, suggesting that years of internal dissent could blossom into decisive change amid the chaos of war.

Through it all, his words danced between caution and conviction—acknowledging the weight of combat, yet radiating confidence that this crucible of conflict could forge a new chapter in US–Iranian relations, however uncertain and fraught.

With IANS inputs