Trump sends more troops to Iran — but it may backfire, analysts say

Nearly a month into the Iran war, the United States is preparing to send thousands of additional soldiers to the Middle East, expanding a military footprint that already has tens of thousands of American personnel in the region.

But the buildup signals something other than preparation for a ground offensive, according to analysts who suggested it is an exercise in coercive diplomacy — designed to increase leverage as President Donald Trump turns up the pressure for Iran to come to the negotiating table.

“President Trump is essentially saying either you — the Iranians — can cut a deal now or face potentially more intense consequences down the road,” Raphael Cohen, a senior political scientist at RAND school of public policy, told CNBC via email. The military buildup gives the president optionality, not just to strike, but to bargain from strength, Cohen noted.

Washington and Tehran have struggled to find a path to start negotiations over peace terms, with each side insisting it holds the upper hand in the conflict while portraying the other as the more desperate one.

The U.S. has circulated a 15-point peace plan, demanding what would amount to a complete termination of Iran’s nuclear program and sharp limits on the reach and size of its missile arsenal — similar to the ones touted in February, before negotiations fell through and led to a joint U.S.-Israeli strike on Iran.

The Iranian government, for its part, has declared it will not end the conflict unless Washington pays war reparations and recognizes Tehran’s “exercise of sovereignty” over the Strait of Hormuz. Earlier on Thursday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that no negotiations were taking place between Tehran and Washington.

Pakistan has offered to facilitate peace talks in pursuit of a “comprehensive settlement” of the ongoing war. But neither Washington nor Tehran has confirmed such discussions.

At the same time, the U.S. ordered on Tuesday to send thousands more soldiers from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division to the region that could be rapidly deployed for possible additional military action, such as seizing the Kharg Island oil port or reopening the strait, if negotiations falter.

Those forces may give the president more leverage in his negotiations, but also risk fueling Tehran’s resentment and provoking a harsher response, analysts say.

“Diplomacy is almost always backed up by force,” Iranian-American historian Arash Azizi said in an email to CNBC, adding that under Trump, this is done even “more openly and more crudely.”

The administration has been notably inconsistent in its messaging, with Trump reportedly saying that he wants a speedy end to the war while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has kept up his warlike warnings, saying that “we see ourselves as part of this negotiation as well. We negotiate with bombs.”

Military hostilities in the region continued spiralling, with the Iranian military reportedly saying in a statement earlier Thursday that it had carried out attacks on satellite stations in Israel as well as Middle Eastern bases hosting U.S. troops.

The gap between what the U.S. and Iran want remains wide, with Israel being another wildcard even if both sides manage to find a common ground, analysts say.

Israel has yet to publicly comment on the peace terms during the latest war of words, with reports indicating Israeli government had been blindsided with Washington’s proposal. CNBC could not verify the claim.

Iranian officials have signaled they will likely reject the U.S.’ terms and have laid out their own list of conditions for ending the war, including Tehran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz.

That may be a nonstarter for the U.S. as Trump on Monday floated the possibility that the strait could be controlled jointly by “me and the ayatollah.” The U.S. demand for restrictions on Iran’s missile program could also be a red line for Tehran.

“How long the conflict lasts will hinge on how long it takes for the two sides to reach common ground,” Cohen said.

The military reinforcements give Trump more options, but analysts say they may not be enough against an adversary that has long prepared for this fight.

The actual U.S. ground combat force may be enough to seize a small, lightly defended target for a short period said Daniel Davis, a senior fellow and military expert at policy think-tank Defense Priorities. However, he said it would not be enough to sustain an operation against a country that has spent years fortifying underground missile cities, dispersing its forces and preparing for precisely this scenario.

“I think [the reinforcement] has a very low probability of success and very high probability of casualties,” Davis said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box Asia” on Thursday. Davis retired from the U.S. Army after 21 years of active service.

The deployment of elite units such as the 82nd Airborne Division could provide rapid on-the-ground response capability, but would not be sustainable without massive follow-on military commitment, Davis said.

U.S. military planning regarding Iran so far has also reflected some miscalculations on Trump’s part, according to the retired military veteran.

The administration may have gained confidence from the successful operation to capture former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January, Davis said, but the geography, military capability and strategic depth of Iran bear little resemblance to the Caracas raid.

Unlike Venezuela, Iran is an enemy that is “very much capable of striking back,” with well-trained proxies across the region and control of the chokepoint through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil flows, Davis said. “This is a more massively difficult task than that in Venezuela,” he added.

But even a managed resolution to the Iran war could leave lasting scars for the world economy and geopolitical landscape, according to Ben Emons, founder of investment management firm FedWatch Advisors.

The ripple effect of the disruption to LNG, helium, sulphur, and fertilizer supply chains could persist for up to 18 months, Emons told CNBC via email. Food inflation will likely remain elevated, creating political repercussions across multiple countries, including the U.S., Emons said.

Should the Strait of Hormuz resume operations at pre-war levels, the oil supply shock, already in deficit, may still persist into the second half of this year, Emons said.

The path to a ceasefire appeared deeply uncertain, with little visibility into whether, or when, the talks between the U.S. and Iran may begin.

“Some sort of pause in the next couple of weeks is likely [but] the question is what will follow the pause,” said Azizi. “It could be that changes in power in Iran allow for a lasting agreement or at least lasting non-belligerence. We could also enter a more war-of-attrition process that becomes another ‘forever war,'” he said.