Virendra Pandit
New Delhi: US President Donald Trump, who lamented in 2025 that he didn’t get the Nobel Peace Prize despite what he claimed ending over half-a-dozen wars, is now preparing for ground invasion of Iran which is fiercely retaliating across West Asia (Middle East) against Israel, the US, and pro-US Arab nations since February 28, the media reported on Thursday.
The fast movement of US troops has raised fears of a risky ground attack on Iran which has publicly rejected Trump’s diplomatic outreach, his 15-point ‘ceasefire plan,’ and threatened massive retaliation if the US does put boots on the ground to break Tehran’s resolve.
Even as Trump flip-flops, takes frequent U-turns, and pushes for talks to end the war against Iran, the US has ordered movement of thousands of troops to the volatile region, fuelling fears that the US President is gearing up for exactly the sort of risky ground invasion that he once campaigned against.
According to reports, current and former military officials and analysts envision three possibilities for US troops. None of them is easy: occupy the Iranian oil nexus of Kharg Island, help in an operation to capture Tehran’s nuclear material, or deploy along Iran’s coast to break the regime’s chokehold over the Strait of Hormuz.
Some Trump allies, including his former Ukraine envoy Keith Kellogg and Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, have touted troop deployments on Iranian soil as a necessary way of forcing Tehran to capitulate. The Iranian regime has warned of even greater retaliation if the US goes ahead with that plan, and opposition has grown among Republicans, as well as Democrats, about the dangers involved.
Among their concerns are: any US troops who deploy will be poorly equipped to defend themselves against a drone-saturated battlefield, fundamentally different from past conflicts. Iran has vowed massive retaliation and to lay naval mines across the Persian Gulf. Casualties could far surpass the 13 American servicemembers killed so far.
While Trump hasn’t unveiled his plans, the Pentagon has reportedly ordered the deployment of two Marine Expeditionary Units — made up with about 5,000 troops along with aircraft and amphibious landing vehicles — to the region. He was also sending more than 1,000 soldiers from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division to the West Asia.
These deployments add to the massive number of aircraft, soldiers and munitions that the US sent to the region before attacking Iran on February 28. As the buildup continued, US officials kept up negotiations with Iran and presented the attack as a last resort after the talks failed multiple times.
They also bear echoes of the Afghanistan conflict, when the US started with a limited deployment of about 3,000 troops in the wake of 9/11/2001. US troop levels quickly rose and topped out at more than 100,000 at the height of the surge under President Barack Obama.
Trump’s allies voiced caution about the deployments and have so far declined to call them a prelude to a bigger ground attack.
He has said repeatedly the US is looking for a resolution to the conflict and is now talking to the Iranians. After giving Iran 48 hours’ warning to open the strait — a deadline that would have expired on Monday evening — Trump extended the window for another five days.
“The United States has been engaged over the last three days in productive conversations,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Wednesday. “You’re beginning to see the regime look for an exit ramp.”
If the US opts to seize Kharg Island, the Marines would likely lead the attack. They can both seize the territory and dig in, according to a former US official. By contrast, soldiers from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division would arrive via parachute and as a light-infantry unit would have lesser protective capabilities.
Seizing Kharg, which typically handles 90 percent of Iran’s crude exports, would choke off Tehran’s primary source of revenue, although the country has other smaller crude terminals.
The moment US troops touched down on the island, a third the size of Manhattan, would be a highly charged symbolic event. And given the existential threat the US posed to Iran — including threats of regime change — it risks loosening the country’s restraint and prompting escalation that would spike US troop casualties, further roil energy markets and pull US allies and adversaries into the conflict even more.
In a letter on Tuesday, Iran’s Defense Council said any encroachment on Iranian land would lead to the mining of the Persian Gulf, not just the Strait.
While Europe is pushing for a swift end to the conflict, Gulf states are increasingly hardening their stances against Tehran, following weeks in which they’ve borne the brunt of a war they didn’t choose but are now considering joining.
Two French officials said deploying troops to Iran would have catastrophic consequences that would lead to even greater escalation.
While Trump continues to insist the US has the upper hand, several of his former staff have broken with the President over the war. They include his former Defense Secretary, James Mattis, who resigned to protest Trump’s decision to withdraw troops from Syria.
“There have been significant military successes but they are not matched by strategic outcomes,” Mattis told the CERAWeek by S&P Global conference.
“Now some of the strategic outcomes early on — unconditional surrender, regime change, we’re going to dictate who the next supreme leader is — those were clearly nonsense, those were delusional.”