CNN: The U.S.-Iran conflict cost $40 billion, ultimately bringing the situation back to the framework of the Iran nuclear deal from the Obama era—a pact that had long been criticized by Trump.
CNN cited calculations from analysts at the Center for Strategic and International Studies: this expenditure includes only ammunition loss, destroyed equipment, and damages to U.S. military bases, and does not account for regular defense budgets already allocated. The largest expense was ammunition, amounting to $26 billion, including nearly a thousand Tomahawk missiles, each costing $2.5 million.
In the end, the U.S. secured only a memorandum, gaining merely an additional 60-day window for negotiations.
Core terms of the agreement: opening the Strait of Hormuz, lifting the blockade on Iranian ports, temporarily easing oil sanctions, discussions on unfreezing Iran’s overseas assets, and resuming inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Iran pledged not to develop nuclear weapons or expand its nuclear program during the negotiation period.
The reality? Trump spent $40 billion on military action, yet the final terms almost returned to the original 2015 Obama-era Iran nuclear deal.
Micro-commentary
Trump previously insisted on withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal, overturning previous diplomatic achievements. Yet after a round of military strikes, the final terms closely resemble those of the Obama era. Military pressure failed to force Iran into full retreat—rendering the military campaign largely ineffective.
This also reveals a fundamental weakness in American-style military brinkmanship. Solely air strikes can cause only short-term damage and cannot compel an opponent to sign a humiliating surrender. Once ground occupation is unfeasible, long-range strikes merely drain the nation's military budget without forcing a major power to make permanent concessions.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1868843005127744/
Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author