Trying to Parse Trump’s Iran Strategy(?)

Our military’s overwhelming tactical victories do not amount to a winning strategy. Even though Trump told the nation in his April televised address that the world is watching and “can’t believe what they’re seeing, the brilliance of the United States military!” A strategy can only succeed by setting a clear end goal, which Trump lacks. Although he has promoted several objectives, only one will fulfill them all: regime change.

Trump set that goal at the start of his war but has since abandoned it—probably because his MAGA base was built on a promise not to engage in another endless war, or at least those that last years, not weeks. He clearly understood that promise when he addressed the nation and his base directly, saying this would be a short military action. He asked Americans to keep this conflict in perspective. It will be short, comparing the time spent fighting a list of each of our last five wars, ending with the eight-year war in Iraq.

An expectation of a quick victory drove Trump to launch his Operation Epic Fury bombing of Iran. It was described as a targeted military operation, not a war. It was to be a “precise” and “necessary” military campaign with limited objectives. However, his objectives kept expanding, all aimed at securing a deal that would force Iran’s remaining leaders to unconditionally surrender. That belief is revealed when he promised to bomb Iran back to the Stone Age unless Iran succumbs to his demands.

He posted in caps on his Truth Social platform that Iran must MAKE A DEAL with him or OPEN UP THE HORMUZ STRAIT within 48 hours; otherwise, on Tuesday, “Hell will reign down on them. Glory be to GOD.” The second time he made this threat, it ended with, “Praise be to Allah.” Is Trump wrapping his arms around religion as he did with the American Flag?

The response from Iran’s top military commander, General Ali Abdollahi Aliabadi, was that the US president’s threat was an “unbalanced and stupid action.” Borrowing from Trump’s grandiose phraseology, he added that his message is simply, “the gates of hell will open for you.” This response doesn’t suggest a quick end to the war with the current regime in power. Despite Trump telling the nation that regime change has happened because of “all of their original leaders’ death,”

Iran has enough weapons to continue fighting for a long time

Trump and his Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, promote the belief that they have already won the war, based on a series of tactical victories. The Pentagon reported that more than 11,000 Iranian sites were hit in the last five weeks, destroying over 300 Iranian ballistic missiles and roughly 250 launchers. Iran’s navy was now resting “at the bottom of the sea,” with over 90% of missile and drone capability destroyed due to more than 20,000 airstrikes by the U.S. and Israel. The results drew praise from both sides of aisle in Congress on our military’s excellent execution in damaging Iran. 

However, US Intelligence discovered that roughly half of Iran’s missile launchers are still intact and retaining thousands of one-way attack drones. Within forty-eight hours after Trump’s prime-time address to the nation, claiming that Iran’s military capability had been “completely decimated,” Iran caused two military aircraft to crash and shot down two Black Hawk helicopters.

The fallacy of just counting how many of the enemies’ weapons were destroyed overlooks the remaining weapons that can still cause damage. In the first month of the Iran War, our warships launched approximately 850 Tomahawk cruise missiles, costing around $3 million each and totaling over $2.5 billion. Our supplies are now running low, and it can take up to two years to manufacture a Tomahawk. 

Meanwhile, Iran’s Shahed-136, also known as the Kamikaze Drone, costs roughly $30,000, about 1% of a Tomahawk’s price. It is less powerful but easier to launch and more mobile. Most importantly, it is hard to detect by air or radar before launch. Still, it can be just as effective at damaging or sinking non-military cargo ships as a $3 million missile. 

Ryan Bohl, a senior Middle East and North Africa analyst at the risk intelligence company Rane, believes that a significant number of Iran’s less advanced short-range ballistic missiles still remain intact. These missiles can be deployed to threaten Gulf states in an “open-ended campaign,” especially if Iran continues attacks at the slower but steady pace they have adopted. Because they are easy to hide and replace, they represent a viable long-term threat to both the Gulf and US military forces.

Even Trump must recognize that the current Iranian regime has the strength and the weapons to engage in a prolonged conflict with the US and continue to harm its hostile Middle Eastern neighbors. As a result, Trump can only achieve his primary and original goal of regime change through an internal revolution or a land invasion. The first option is unlikely, and the second would be a disaster for America.

Iran’s citizens won’t overthrow their theocratic autocracy 

The current Iranian regime has shown that it is willing and capable of killing civilians simply for protesting. The UN Special Rapporteur on Iran stated that the number of protestors killed in January could be as high as 20,000. Two senior officials from the country’s Ministry of Health told TIME that as many as 30,000 people could have been killed. Iran’s military-led government would likely kill many more if there were an actual threat of being overthrown.

As Trump started bombing Iran, he told Iranian civilians to “Take over your government. It will be yours to take. The hour of your freedom is at hand.” It was a dishonest suggestion, ignoring that the people are unarmed and any visible opposition would lead to their death. In his address to the nation, Trump mentioned how Iranian civilians were killed by “the most violent and thuggish regime on earth,” but he offered no condolences to the victims, nor any support for citizens trying to take control of their government. 

The Guardian reported that the Iranian regime organized more than 850 public demonstrations of support for the government since the war began. According to experts, like the president of ACLED, an independent conflict monitor, the turnout highlighted the resilience of the Islamic Republic despite a month-long campaign of intensive airstrikes by the US and Israel. 

Large protests opposing the regime and supporting it highlight a divided citizenry in Iran, with the military favoring one side. There will be no effective uprising without a key part of the military turning against the theocratic regime. 

Two reasons why troops fighting in Iran would be disastrous

Iran is too large to conquer. It is four times the size of Iraq, has a population of more than 90 million, and features extensive inhospitable territory that makes supplying an invading army challenging. Although Iran’s terrain differs significantly from Vietnam’s, we failed there to remove a regime even with ground troops because bombing alone does not lead to conquest. Instead, victory depends on land acquisition. 

We do not have enough soldiers, even if Israel contributed theirs, to maintain control of Iran’s land mass. Our losses in soldiers, military supplies, and financial resources would weaken the US’s ability to defend itself from other hostile nations. And the Republican Party would be tossed out of D.C., no matter how much Trump beats the drum for war as the only way to secure our safety. 

The second reason is that after April 29, 2026, the War Powers Act’s 60-day threshold is triggered, requiring Trump to withdraw our armed forces from hostilities unless Congress authorizes the action or declares war. That’s why Trump kept referring to swiftly ending the conflict in 4 to 6 weeks. Supporting Trump’s war could openly rupture the Republicans in Congress, giving the Democrats the ability to apply severe restraints on conducting the war as Trump wishes. 

Trump could also seize Iran’s small but vital Kharg Island. While it covers only one-tenth the land area of Washington D.C., 90% of Iran’s oil exports go through Kharg. Our recently deployed force of 5,000 US Marines and 2,000 paratroopers could overpower their heavily armed garrison, though it would likely come with a high number of casualties for our invading troops. 

Trump would be borrowing a page from Putin’s seizure of Ukraine’s Snake Island in the Black Sea. However, the Russians were driven off it by constant harassing fire from the Ukrainian mainland. Iranians would do the same, unless our troops entered Iran’s mainland, which would start an endless and futile war. 

Will Tomorrow see the Final Solution?

Unless Trump agrees to Iran’s conditions, the war will go on, and Congress will then be forced to either approve it or publicly ignore it. If Trump gets frustrated by being stuck in Iran, he might resolve this dilemma by either walking away from the war to let his “allies” handle the fallout or by bombing major civilian infrastructure, such as key bridges, power plants, and desalination facilities. Iranian civilians will suffer directly and immediately, possibly feeling they are being sacrificed by either Iran’s authoritarian rulers or America’s authoritarian Trump.  

One possible and alarming scenario for the next phase of the war is Iran somehow launching an attack within the US through a sleeper cell or a lone terrorist linked to Iran in some way. Then, we would be truly opening the gates of hell.