Can US midterm election really change Trump's Iran policy?

The US election this Tuesday is shaping up to be one of the most consequential midterm votes in modern US history, with Washington's relationship with Israel and its war on Iran right at the center of the political standoff.

Many Democrats, including the party's rising stars such as Ohio Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed, are outspoken critics of the Iran war, with El-Sayed calling the conflict "illegal" and "stupid."

US President Donald Trump sought to downplay the effects of the war during the campaign. Last week, he claimed only "one or two targets" remained in Iran and that those could be settled in 10 minutes. However, he immediately added that messages are still being exchanged, Tehran shows strong interest in a deal, and the US has plenty of time to deal with the crisis.

At the same time, there are reports of the US and Israel preparing to launch a new round of strikes on Iran just after the midterm election and pro-war Republicans such as Senator Ted Cruz are putting pressure on the White House to deal with "the threat" posed by Iran.

"I have urged arming the Iranian protesters to overthrow the regime," Cruz said in an online post after spending a day with Trump.

Behind the scenes, analysts warn that the Washington political elite may not be as divided on Iran as it appears. Moreover, even a resounding Democrat victory might not give them enough leverage on the Trump administration regarding the Iran war.

Talking to DW, former National Security Advisor John Bolton said the Democrats are likely to secure a majority in the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate, handing them control of the Iran war funding.

The US Congress "can allocate defense budgets or impose restrictions on the use of financial resources," Bolton said.

Nevertheless, Bolton points out that the US president can veto congressional legislation, which would then require a two-thirds majority in both assemblies to overcome.

"Even if Democrats hold a majority in both houses, their influence will be limited to the legislative and political tools of Congress," he said.

US diplomat and Iran expert Alan Eyre points to a kind of "bipartisan consensus" that Republicans and Democrats have on Iran.

"Both major US parties share significant common ground in their opposition to the political structure of the Islamic Republic and in their support for policies aimed at exerting pressure on Tehran to change its behavior," he said.

While warning of a "crushing response" to any new strikes on underground sites, Tehran has confirmed ongoing indirect communication via Doha and Muscat, keeping its diplomatic option open.

Shahin Modarres, an international security analyst leading the Iran team at ITSS Verona, told DW that Tehran's actions are based on a miscalculation. The regime, he argues, assumes that a Democratic Congress can easily restrain the White House.

Tehran's strategy in dragging out peace talks, pressuring the Strait of Hormuz, and letting fuel prices weigh on US voters, aims to deny Trump a win before November. However, Modarres notes this strategy may backfire after the election, as the Trump administration will no longer have any reason to delay its moves.

This approach also ignores the fact that both US parties largely agree on not letting Iranian develop nuclear weapons, he said.

Trump's ally-turned-critic John Bolton believes that Trump will only decide on his next steps on Iran after the election, once the political pressure grows less acute.

"I cannot predict what the US President will do; even Trump himself does not know his final decision right now," he told DW.

Bolton cites as an example a possible US attack on "Kuh-e Kolang," the new nuclear site he claims the Iranian government is constructing near Natanz.

"In this scenario, Trump could damage these facilities, declare victory, and pull back."

Trump has consistently emphasized that the US goal is to deny Iran the capability of acquiring nuclear weapons. Throughout the conflict, the US president has also repeatedly claimed his administration had succeeded in this regard.

Bolton, in contrast, believes that the Islamic Republic will continue to pursue nuclear weapons capability for as long as it remains in power.

The former Trump advisor views "regime change" as the only sustainable solution to keep Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Eyre, the first Persian-speaking diplomat to be the spokesperson for the US Department of State, emphasizes the difficulty of using external tools to bring about sustainable change. In his view, even if there is a consensus in Washington opposing the Islamic Republic and demanding a change in its behavior, this US consensus alone cannot overcome the structural obstacles to political change inside Iran. He reiterates that any fundamental transformation must emerge from within Iranian society itself.

The veteran diplomat also points to the failure of "Washington's public diplomacy to convey a clear, coherent, and authentic message to Iranian society."

He notes that official US government messaging is only incompletely reflected in the media outlets that the vast majority of Iranian citizens rely on for news.

"Furthermore, targeted and principled engagement with the core of Iranian society has generally not been a priority for successive US administrations," he said.

"Iranian citizens see that the US takes certain positions at the rhetorical level, but behaves differently in practice."

According to Eyre, this gap between words and deeds in Washington is a structural phenomenon that is not limited to a single administration or a single election cycle.