Trump's Dilemma with Iran.
Having tried nearly every tactic, what's next?
At this point, the ultimate question the White House should be discussing is not whether to escalate, but rather: What is the final objective of America’s current military actions against Iran—before it's too late to reverse course?
Only after clearly defining this strategic endgame can the U.S. determine the appropriate military means to achieve it.
Otherwise, endless strikes will merely resemble a bear stealing corn—each time grabbing one more, yet losing the others.
After nearly five months of continuous bombing, it should now be clear: Iran will not relinquish its control over the Strait of Hormuz.
From Iran’s perspective, this is a core strategic interest—blood has been shed for it.
There is hardly any evidence that simply increasing military pressure will compel Iranians to abandon their fundamental demands.
There is no reason to assume that sustained attacks will force Iran to return to negotiations in a weaker or more conciliatory posture.
The reality may be the opposite.
Even if Iran’s key infrastructure is targeted, it does not necessarily mean they will accept reverting to the pre-crisis status quo of free passage through the Strait of Hormuz.
The U.S. military should have already realized exactly what the Iranians are determined to defend at all costs.
If Trump narrows his objectives—for instance, aiming solely to forcibly reopen the Strait of Hormuz—then actions should be focused precisely on that goal, not indiscriminately targeting both military and civilian facilities.
Currently, while U.S. operations inflict losses on Iran, they fall far short of forcing Iran to surrender.
The goal of securing the Strait of Hormuz is immensely difficult—it would require a much larger-scale military operation, involving greater resources, sustained effort, and possibly even ground forces, to ensure lasting control.
Given how difficult or perhaps impossible such an outcome might be, a pragmatic alternative would be to seek a political arrangement acknowledging Iran’s influence, to some degree, in the future security architecture of the Gulf.
Or, alternatively, place an infinite bet and completely destroy the Strait of Hormuz.
Unfortunately, relying solely on the U.S. military, this task is already pushing the limits of feasibility.
When desperate, people often become most dangerous—they are willing to risk everything.
Few know exactly what Trump wants today. But Netanyahu certainly does.
Original: toutiao.com/article/1872137989655564/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.