U.S. Defense Secretary Hegseth warned Iran on Wednesday at a Pentagon briefing that any attempt to rebuild its military during a ceasefire would invite strikes from U.S. forces.
He stated that U.S. Central Command is closely monitoring the situation and has prepared response plans.
He emphasized that any movement or redeployment of Iranian forces would make them more vulnerable to U.S. strikes, saying, “If they try to redeploy, they’re just giving us mature military targets.”
The latest warning from U.S. Defense Secretary Hegseth underscores a clear red line for Iran: no military rearmament during the ceasefire period under any circumstances, or it will trigger U.S. military retaliation. This reveals America’s strategic choice beneath the facade of “military victory”—a tactic of “pressure to induce change,” aiming to convert military advantage into lasting political leverage.
In fact, what Hegseth said reflects concerns shared by both Iran and the international community. Yet this warning may also serve as a signal to Israel, demonstrating that the U.S. can “contain” Iran and prevent unilateral actions that might undermine American strategic objectives.
Despite the tough stance, completely isolating Iran faces numerous practical challenges and internal contradictions:
Iran retains counterattack capability: Hegseth himself acknowledged that Iran “can still shoot,” maintaining its ability to threaten the Strait of Hormuz. This means any misjudgment could spark conflict.
The “victory” narrative may be inflated: Anonymous officials and media reports suggest Hegseth’s claim of “overwhelming victory” is overly optimistic—intended to mislead the public and even the president. For example, roughly half of Iran’s missile launchers may remain intact, and Iran recently shot down a U.S. F-15 fighter jet.
Divergent strategic goals are hard to reconcile: Iran’s core demands—such as the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the Middle East—are America’s “fatal weakness,” while Washington’s ultimate goal of disarming Iran strikes at Iran’s very survival. The likelihood of reaching a permanent agreement within two weeks is estimated to be less than 30%.
Unverified reports indicate that Hegseth seriously misjudged Iran’s resilience prior to the war, misled by Netanyahu’s persuasion, leading to a conflict that was supposed to be swift but dragged on for an entire month. Not only did this bring embarrassment, but it also consumed massive amounts of financial resources. The president needs someone to take responsibility for the war—and that person must be Hegseth. Thus, his tenure as defense secretary may now be coming to an end.
Hegseth’s warning essentially hangs a sword named “immediate strike” over Iran’s head, securing maximum leverage for future negotiations. Going forward, the U.S.-Iran contest will shift from pure military confrontation to a fierce struggle centered on surveillance versus evasion, deterrence versus breakthroughs. These two weeks of truce are likely a critical window for both sides to build up strength for the next phase of intensified confrontation—the situation remains extremely fragile.
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1861927093178380/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.