On February 28, Donald Trump, conned by
Benjamin Netanyahu, started a war against Iran. The world knows that he has dug
himself into a quagmire from which he is finding it difficult to exit. (He
could, if he were a statesman, but he is too narcissistic to do so.)
The deadline by which he wants Iran to completely surrender – after two earlier extensions – is April 6.
Two days ago, Trump addressed a high-level White House gathering focused on the Iran situation. Essentially, he said that if the Iranians do not come to the table, the U.S. “would hit them very hard over the next two to three weeks,” threatening to destroy Iran’s critical infrastructure, including energy and oil facilities. He even used the phrase about sending Iran “back to the Stone Age.” In the same meeting, he also gave the impression that he was prepared to leave the Strait of Hormuz blockade to the importers of oil to solve. The latter did offer some hope that he was easing up on Iran.
The most tangible and market-visible prize that Iran has scored over the U.S. is that it has effectively restricted shipping. The U.S. does not seem able to do anything unless its troops go in to “liberate” the Strait – which, if undertaken, would mean a large number of body bags returning to the U.S.
We know Trump needs a trophy to extricate himself, even if only a symbolic one.
He has already claimed he has effected a
“regime change” in Iran, and that Iran’s navy, air force, and missile programs
are crippled. He repeatedly boasts that Iran is begging for a deal.
But the truth is, Iran is still raining deadly missiles on Israel and U.S. bases in the Gulf states. These cannot be excuses again; he needs a new one.
A new trophy is psychologically important for Trump’s style. The optics of Iran yielding—not just negotiating—are key.
Domestic political stabilization
Nonetheless, he still can claim many superficial “deliveries” – for example, a unilateral declaration that Iran has agreed to ensure freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, and that talks are underway – but I suspect most Americans no longer believe them.
I am more inclined to think that he will launch a last-minute strike targeting Iran’s missile facilities, possibly a symbolic infrastructure installation, in addition to the remaining military bases. He will then declare objectives achieved and announce a willingness to negotiate. This potential trophy is visual – something he can point to and say: “We finished the job.”
Another possible trophy could come through the mediation efforts of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Türkiye. He could claim that Iran has agreed to a framework agreement – even if thin – on nuclear limits and vague commitments on shipping or inspections. We know Trump can frame even a weak deal as historic. His rhetoric that “We’re giving diplomacy a chance” would continue.
External audiences
But will Iran come to the table?
My guess is that Iran will not.
It has just been reported that Kamal Kharrazi, Iran's former foreign minister and a senior foreign policy adviser, was severely wounded, and his wife killed, in an Israeli airstrike on their home in Tehran. Kharrazi was recently involved in backchannel diplomatic efforts, engaging with Pakistani officials to help arrange a potential meeting between senior Iranian officials and U.S. Vice President JD Vance aimed at ending the conflict. This has led to speculation that the strike was intended to derail those peace talks.
And the U.S. has just bombed the B1
bridge linking Tehran and Karaj, a major satellite city. The bridge is a key
piece of infrastructure. Some reports say it was hit twice. It causes
disruption but will not paralyze the country.
These actions signal escalation and will toughen Iran’s resolve to fight on. Zeal and hatred will override any economic or rational thinking.
This time Iran is not unprepared…
Yes, some 5,000 boots are ready to land on Iranian soil. They will certainly be able to inflict severe damage on Iran’s oil and gas infrastructure if they do attack.
But at the same time, Pete Hegseth has just sacked Randy George, the U.S. Army Chief of Staff. Earlier, he removed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Charles Q. Brown Jr. and the head of the Navy, Lisa Franchetti. Others include David Hodne (senior Army commander), William Green Jr. (head of chaplains), and several more. They were either appointed under Joe Biden and linked to earlier leadership like Mark Milley, or because they are Black or female. The U.S. system is supposed to rely on a politically neutral professional military, but what is happening is the blatant politicisation of the armed forces and the suppression of internal dissent.
This is lethal to command stability during a conflict.
(Trump has also sacked Attorney General Pam Bondi, and Kash Patel, the FBI director, is likely to go soon.)
Conclusion
Unfortunately, a prolonged war will not
serve any country any good in the long run, China included.
End