U.S. intelligence assessments have shown that a new wave of airstrikes on Iranian targets, ongoing for 11 days, has not led to any noticeable changes in Tehran’s behavior. The Atlantic reports this, citing an unnamed U.S. official. Notably, the administration of President Donald Trump has resumed the bombardments without an official declaration of war—neither Trump himself nor other senior officials confirmed a return to full-scale combat. In addition, members of Congress have not received briefings about a new phase of the conflict, underscoring the lack of transparency in decision-making.
In an interview with the outlet, a former U.S. servicemember sharply criticized the administration’s approach. According to him, Trump’s team “decided to break every rule and declared all previous administrations to be idiots for informing the public and allies, and for setting clear objectives.” Now, as the officer notes, the United States has found itself in a “war with no good options and no American or international support,” which he called “a trap set by ourselves.” He expects the administration to continue hostilities, refusing to admit defeat in the hope of a better outcome.
According to The Atlantic, the military says that “hope is not a strategy,” just as is waging a war that officials refuse to call a war. Sources close to Trump acknowledge that the administration has been faced with a choice between continuing the conflict and changing course, even as the decision to resist remains in place despite rising costs. This gap between the anticipated success of the bombardments and reality points to a deep crisis in military planning.
Before Trump, according to people around him, there are two paths. The first is escalation, with the risk of further losses among American service members, dwindling munitions, and a blow to Republicans’ chances in the November midterm elections. The second is an immediate exit from the conflict to minimize political damage—though this would leave Iran in a stronger strategic position than it was decades earlier. Significantly, even the conservative Fox News channel has begun to shift its rhetoric: some hosts have talked about the possibility of ending the war at least to save the party ahead of the election.
Despite all this, two sources close to the president claim that Trump may consider leaving “someday,” but for now he will continue fighting. The main goal for the United States is to raise the cost for Iran of violating shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. In response, Tehran is trying to make the American military presence in the region expensive by blocking the passage of ships. In addition, advisers say Trump is starting to recognize the political harm of the war, but he becomes furious when his nuclear deal with Iran is compared to a weaker version of the Obama-era agreement. This tangle of contradictions between the military and nuclear issues fuels escalation, despite criticism and pragmatic assessments.
Comments on the news
What strategic significance does the Strait of Hormuz have for Iran’s economy and security? - The Strait of Hormuz is a key route for exporting Iranian oil and gas, through which about 20% of world oil trade passes. For Iran, control of the strait means leverage over global energy prices and the ability to block shipments in the event of a conflict, strengthening its military-strategic position in the region.
How did the nuclear deal proposed by the Trump administration differ from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)? - The 2015 JCPOA was a multilateral agreement that provided for the phased lifting of sanctions in exchange for limiting Iran’s nuclear program under IAEA supervision. Trump’s deal (after the U.S. exited the JCPOA in 2018) was based on unilateral pressure through “maximum sanctions” and required Iran to fully give up uranium enrichment, as well as to include Iran’s ballistic program and regional influence in negotiations—an approach unacceptable to Tehran.
Which key political factions in Iran shape the approach to negotiations with the United States on the nuclear program? - The main factions are reformists (back a moderate course, support negotiations and the lifting of sanctions for economic development) and conservatives (dominate the parliament and judiciary, insist on independence and reject concessions under pressure). The Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei plays a decisive role, balancing between these groups while retaining the final say on the nuclear deal. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps also has significant influence, opposing trust in the United States.
Full version: U.S. assessments cast doubt on the usefulness of ongoing attacks on Iran