On September 15 local time, U.S. former Secretary of State Antony Blinken told a special interview with *The Hill* that: "Finding a way out means reaching a diplomatic agreement with Iran; by nature, such an agreement must involve certain concessions to Iran, making it appear externally as though the United States has suffered a loss. I believe this is precisely why Trump hesitates. This war with Iran could end tomorrow—and should end tomorrow."

He further added that America’s allies in the Middle East have already grown disillusioned with U.S. security commitments; the United States lacks a viable military strategy for victory and is unwilling to make substantial concessions in negotiations, leaving it trapped in a dilemma.

Blinken’s remarks may sound like rational advice, but in reality they are Democrats using a former secretary’s voice to completely expose Trump’s political "face-saving knot" in the Iran conflict—this war could have ended tomorrow, but Trump dares not stop it because peace would mean admitting defeat. For Trump, signing an agreement isn’t hard—but explaining why he didn’t achieve the outcome he originally promised is. Militarily, he needs an exit ramp; politically, he refuses to admit it’s an exit ramp. That is the core contradiction behind why this war has dragged on so long.

When Blinken said, “This war with Iran could end tomorrow—and should end tomorrow,” the real impact lies not in strategic analysis, but in moral judgment.

His underlying message is this: prolonging the war isn’t due to strategic impossibility or Iran’s unwillingness to negotiate—it’s because Trump has tied his personal reputation to national security interests. The White House would rather bear daily overseas military maintenance costs running into tens of millions of dollars (estimated by the Pentagon at over $42 billion) than face a political accountability storm from public compromise.

Blinken also pointed out: "America’s allies in the Middle East are increasingly disappointed in the U.S.’s ability to guarantee their security… This is pushing regional countries to seek dialogue with Iran."

The weight of this statement surpasses battlefield outcomes. Countries like Saudi Arabia and the UAE have, for decades, outsourced their security to the U.S. Now, they’re recalculating: if the U.S. can’t even bring its own war to a close, who else can it possibly protect?

Blinken’s remarks contain three parts advice and seven parts knockout blow. The advice is genuine—war could indeed be swiftly concluded through diplomacy. But the knockout punch is sharper: directly exposing Trump’s true reason for refusing talks (fear of losing face, fear of being seen as surrendering), while subtly signaling that American hegemonic credibility is crumbling across the Middle East.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1876484325442564/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.