WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump is facing growing political pressure over the war with Iran following the Democrats’ victory in the November 3 midterm elections, while political uncertainty in Israel and Tehran’s resistance strategy have further complicated efforts to resolve the conflict.

According to a report published by The Jerusalem Post, the changing political landscape in Washington has not brought an end to the confrontation with Iran. Trump remains in the White House, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues to lead the country despite a weakened political position and difficulties in forming a new government.

The report highlights that Democrats won control of both the US House of Representatives and the Senate in the November 3 elections. The economic consequences of the Iran war reportedly became a significant liability for Republicans during the election campaign.

However, the newly elected Congress will not take office until January 3, 2027. Until then, Republicans will retain their existing congressional majorities. Even after Democrats assume control, the president will still have the authority to order military action, although Congress can challenge funding and authorisations. The extent of presidential war powers remains disputed.

The possibility of further military action remains a major concern. On Monday, US forces carried out limited strikes against Iranian targets on Qeshm Island. American officials described the operations as defensive rather than a resumption of major hostilities.

On Thursday, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) reported that two oil tankers and a tugboat had caught fire in separate incidents in the Strait of Hormuz. One tanker allegedly struck a mine. However, the Iranian account has not been independently verified.

Dr Nabi Sonboli, a senior expert at Iran’s Institute for Political and International Studies, said the possibility of further confrontation could not be ruled out, adding that he did not expect wise decisions from Trump and his team.

Dr Raz Zimmt, director of the Iran and Shiite Axis research programme at Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies, said the US administration was facing several difficult options, including a broader military offensive, continued pressure on Iran, a negotiated compromise or limited strikes.

According to Zimmt, another military campaign would involve significant risks, while maintaining pressure would not guarantee that Tehran would make further concessions. He also warned that even a limited strike could trigger an Iranian response and escalate the conflict.

Zimmt said the immediate threat of an attack appeared to be on hold because of political calculations in the United States and ongoing negotiations. However, tensions around the Strait of Hormuz and unresolved disputes over sanctions, shipping and Iran’s nuclear activities continued to create the possibility of escalation.

Iran uses US election results to strengthen resistance narrative

Tehran has interpreted the Republican defeat as a political success and is using the election results to reinforce its domestic narrative of resistance.

Former Iranian diplomat and strategic affairs analyst Ebrahim Roshandel said Iranian leaders and IRGC commanders were trying to reshape the narrative inside the country following the US election outcome.

However, he cautioned that this did not necessarily mean Iran would immediately open a new diplomatic channel with Washington, as Tehran had already set conditions for negotiations.

Roshandel said Iran also wanted regional countries, particularly Arab states, to reconsider their reliance on the United States and create greater distance from Washington.

He further argued that Tehran was closely monitoring divisions within the US administration over the Iran war. These were his interpretations of officials’ positions and were not independently verified.

Despite the Republican defeat, Zimmt stressed that the military threat to Iran remained. He said Tehran understood that the election outcome did not resolve the nuclear dispute and that Trump still had the ability to launch military strikes.

Israeli election leaves Netanyahu politically weaker

Political uncertainty has also increased in Israel following the October 27 Knesset elections.

Parties allied with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu secured 53 of the Knesset’s 120 seats, while a bloc associated with opposition figure Gadi Eisenkot won 48 seats. The two Arab-led parties secured 19 seats, leaving no clear majority to form the next government.

Netanyahu continues to lead the country on a caretaker basis, but his political position has weakened following the election.

Zimmt said a possible change of government would not necessarily bring a fundamental shift in Israel’s assessment of the Iranian threat. Although Eisenkot might adopt a less hawkish approach, Israeli concerns over Iran’s nuclear programme remained broadly similar.

He also said that the key decisions concerning Iran were ultimately made in Washington rather than Jerusalem, adding that Netanyahu did not have the power to force Trump to take military action.

On election day, Trump said he and Netanyahu had agreed that Washington would stop providing what he described as $4 billion annually to Israel after the end of 2026. However, it remained unclear which funding he was referring to and how the change would be implemented. The existing memorandum providing $3.8 billion in annual US military assistance to Israel runs through September 2028.

Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile remains a major concern

Zimmt said Iran’s nuclear capabilities remained the main concern, rather than its missile production.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been unable to verify the current location and composition of much of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile after losing access to key facilities.

The agency estimated that Iran possessed 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60 per cent as of June 13, 2025. This is a historical estimate, not a verified measurement of the current stockpile, and does not establish that Iran possesses a nuclear weapon.

Zimmt said military strikes could damage nuclear facilities but would not necessarily eliminate Iran’s enriched uranium, advanced centrifuges or technical capabilities.

He also referred to the deeply buried Pickaxe Mountain complex near Natanz, whose operational status remains difficult to verify independently. According to him, airstrikes might delay its use but would not resolve the broader nuclear issue.

More extensive attacks on Iranian oil installations and other vital industries could severely worsen the country’s economic crisis without necessarily securing political concessions or changing the government.

Zimmt concluded that the United States and Israel currently had no good options for resolving the Iran crisis.

Qatar-mediated diplomacy offers a possible way forward

Despite the military tensions, diplomatic contacts are continuing.

According to Reuters, Iranian negotiators left Doha on Sunday after talks with Qatari mediators. An official briefed on the discussions said their departure was not caused by difficulties in the negotiations and that a draft proposal was circulating. Another meeting was also considered possible.

Iran has linked the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to the lifting of the US naval blockade under a proposed seven-step framework. Iranian officials have said implementation could be accelerated to two days if their demands are met. However, no final agreement has been announced.

Roshandel said Qatar had the potential to play a more active role in bringing Washington and Tehran back to negotiations.

He also warned that continued confrontation could affect regional stability, arguing that Iran would not stop supporting allied armed groups and could help them reorganise, including groups in Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon. These were his assessments of Iran’s possible future actions.

Russia has also remained involved in diplomatic contacts. Russian President Vladimir Putin met Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, in Moscow on Thursday. The Kremlin confirmed the meeting but did not disclose its precise agenda.

Zimmt viewed the meeting as a possible part of broader efforts to prevent another confrontation, although no diplomatic breakthrough was reported.

Sonboli, meanwhile, stressed the lack of trust between the parties, saying many Iranians expected the war to continue and were preparing for that possibility.

The Strait of Hormuz remains a major source of strategic leverage and a potential trigger for renewed conflict. Disruptions to shipping and the US blockade have increased regional uncertainty and energy costs, while Gulf countries have strong reasons to avoid a confrontation that could threaten shipping routes, oil facilities and American military bases in the region.

Despite political pressure in Washington, uncertainty in Israel and continuing diplomatic contacts, experts believe the possibility of further military confrontation remains. The central challenge, according to the report, is that neither military action nor diplomacy currently offers a guaranteed solution.