Know in Short Order: As Tehran Cracks Down, Trump’s Likely Instincts Are to Stay Out

I have not previously witnessed a communications blackout in Iran of this magnitude — not during earlier protest waves, nor during Israel’s confrontation with Iran. What little imagery is emerging, primarily through state television, is highly selective: armed protesters, burning buildings, and official claims of sabotage. Combined with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s defiant address, the picture suggests that an extremely violent crackdown is either imminent or already underway.

If some policymakers are assuming that such a crackdown will increase pressure on Donald Trump to intervene militarily, the evidence suggests the opposite.

First, widespread violence produces precisely the kind of disorder Trump tends to avoid. His record shows a preference for interventions that appear clean, decisive, and low-risk. When military action becomes messy or unpredictable, he pulls back.

Yemen is a useful example. Despite advice to the contrary, Trump authorized strikes against the Houthis, only to reverse course once the promised quick victory failed to materialize — and U.S. aircraft came close to being lost. Iran, amid mass unrest and state violence, would present an even more complex battlefield. Even if protesters appear to gain momentum, Trump is more likely to wait until the last — and safest — moment to act, so that any intervention maximizes political credit at minimal cost.