Trump will claim he has won when America loses. This is certain

مرگ بر آمریکا

سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی

The war on Iran will end in American retreat





The American empire cannot win the war against Iran at acceptable financial, military, and political costs.


The war against Iran that the United States and Israel launched on February 28, 2026, will likely end in an American retreat.

The United States cannot continue the war without producing disastrous consequences.

A renewed escalation would lead to the destruction of the region’s oil, gas, and desalination infrastructure, causing a prolonged global catastrophe.

Iran can credibly impose costs that the United States cannot bear and that the world would not suffer.

The US – Israel war plan was a decapitation strike, sold to President Donald Trump by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and David Barnea, the director of the Mossad.

The premise was that an aggressive joint US–Israeli bombing campaign would so degrade the Iranian regime’s command structure, nuclear program, and IRGC senior leadership that the regime would fracture.

The United States and Israel would then impose a pliable government in Tehran.

Trump seems to have been convinced that Iran would follow the same course as had occurred in Venezuela.

The US operation in Venezuela in January 2026 removed Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in what appears to have been a coordinated operation between the CIA and elements inside the Venezuelan state.

The US won a more pliant regime, while most of the Venezuelan power structure remained in place.

Trump seems to have believed naively that the same outcome would occur in Iran.

The Iran operation, however, failed to produce a pliant regime in Tehran.

Iran is not Venezuela, historically, technologically, culturally, geographically, militarily, demographically, or geopolitically.

Whatever happened in Caracas had little relation to what would take place in Tehran.

  1. The Iranian government did not fracture.
  2. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), far from being decapitated, emerged with a tightened internal command and an expanded role in the national-security architecture.
  3. The supreme leader’s office held; the religious establishment closed ranks behind it; and the population rallied against external attack.

Two months on, Trump and Netanyahu have no Iranian successor government under their control, no Iranian surrender to close the war, and no military pathway whatsoever to victory.

The only path, and the one the US seems to be taking, is a retreat, with Iran in charge of the Strait of Hormuz and with none of the other issues between the US and Iran settled.

Several reasons explain America’s disastrous miscalculations and Iran’s successes.

  1. First, American leaders fundamentally misjudged Iran. Iran is a great civilisation with 5,000 years of history, deep culture, national resilience, and pride. The Iranian government was not going to succumb to US bullying and bombing, especially reflecting on the fact that Iranians remember how the US destroyed Iranian democracy in 1953 by overthrowing a democratically elected government and installing a police state that lasted 27 years.
  2. Second, American leaders dramatically underestimated Iran’s technological sophistication. Iran has world-class engineering and mathematics. It has built an indigenous defence industrial base, with advanced ballistic missiles, a homegrown drone industry, and indigenous orbital launch capability. Iran’s record of technological development, built up despite 40 years of escalating sanctions, is a stunning national achievement.
  3. Third, military technology has shifted in a way that favours Iran. Iran’s ballistic missiles cost a small fraction of the US interceptors deployed against them. Iranian drones cost $20,000; US air-defence interceptor missiles cost $4m. Iran’s antiship missiles, with costs in the low six figures, threaten US destroyers that cost $2-3bn. Iran’s anti-access and area-denial network around the Gulf, layered air defence, drone and missile saturation capacity, and sea-denial capability in the strait have made the operational cost of imposing American will on Iran far higher than the United States can sustain, especially taking into account the retaliatory destruction that Iran can impose on the neighbouring countries.
  4. Fourth, the US policy process has become irrational.

The Iran war was decided by a small circle of presidential loyalists at Mar-a-Lago, with no formal interagency process and a National Security Council that had been hollowed out across the preceding year.

Trump’s director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Joe Kent, resigned on March 17 with a public letter describing “an echo chamber” used to deceive the president.

The war was the output of a decision-making system in which the deliberative apparatus had been turned off.

This was neither a war of necessity, nor a war of choice.

It was a war of whim.

The underlying premise was hegemony.

The United States was attempting to preserve a global dominance that it no longer possesses, and Israel was trying to establish a regional dominance that it will never have.

The likely endgame, given all this, is that the war will likely end with a return to something close to the status quo ante, except for three new facts on the ground.

  1. First, Iran will have operational control over the Strait of Hormuz.
  2. Second, Iran’s deterrent posture will be significantly raised.
  3. Third, the US long-term military presence in the Gulf will be significantly reduced.
The other excuses that supposedly prompted the US to attack Iran — Iran’s nuclear program, regional proxies, the missile arsenal — will be left where they were at the start of the war.

Even as the US retreats, Iran will not press its advantage against its neighbors.

Three reasons explain why.

  1. First, Iran has a long-term strategic interest in cooperation with its Gulf neighbors, not an ongoing war.
  2. Second, Iran will have no interest in restarting a war it has just successfully ended.
  3. Third, Iran will be restrained, if any restraint is needed, by its great-power patrons, Russia and China, who both desire a stable and prosperous region.

The Iranian leadership understands this clearly, and will stop the fighting.

Trump will no doubt try to depict the coming retreat as some great military and strategic victory.

No such claims will be true.

The truth is that Iran is far more sophisticated than the United States understood; the decision to go to war was irrational; and the underlying technology of war has shifted against the US.

The American empire cannot win the war against Iran at an acceptable financial, military, and political cost.

What America can regain, however, is some measure of rationality. It’s time for the US to end its regime-change operations.




epa_69fefab10547-1778318001.jpg
 

Trump administration claiming a ‘win’ against Iran – here’s a report card



Two months into the war in Iran, the reasons the US gave for launching this conflict – and Washington’s minimum criteria for claiming success – now appear unintelligible. So much so that US officials are now arguing the war had actually ended in America’s favor almost a month ago.

It is hard to think of a more damning indictment of Donald Trump’s catastrophic war on Iran than the spectacle of his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, telling reporters on May 5 that the main goal now was to get the Strait of Hormuz “back to the way it was: anyone can use it, no mines in the water, nobody paying tolls”.

Rubio ignored the obvious contradiction that the "humanitarian operation" had been necessitated by the very war he was simultaneously presenting as already won.

Things took an even more absurd turn later that day. Trump announced he was suspending “Project Freedom”, his plan for the US Navy to escort tankers out of the strait, after just one day. The US president cited “great progress” toward an agreement with Iran. As has happened several times now, global stock markets rallied before falling back again.

While few doubt Trump is desperate to put his disastrous war behind him, particularly before heading to Beijing on May 14, he massively oversold the impression of a breakthrough.

The more convincing reason Trump abandoned Project Freedom is that it was already clear it would not solve the crisis. Most owners of the 1,500 ships currently stranded behind the strait were unwilling to trust Trump.

Washington’s problem is that the Iranians insist talks can only begin if Trump agrees to end the US blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump lacks the detailed and institutionalized policy apparatus of his predecessor, Barack Obama, whose 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran the current US president so desperately wants to outdo. Obama’s deal took 20 months of intense wrangling to complete. Trump has neither the patience, technical expertise or direct diplomatic connections to achieve the same.

Added to this are new conditions created by the war itself. Iran’s higher tolerance for military and economic pressure has introduced uncertainty into the equation.

It is difficult to see how any amount of US and Israeli bombing can force the Iranians to surrender.

Trump’s shifting aims for the war and desperate scramble for an exit underscore that this entire enterprise has been a colossal strategic failure.

The war has has shattered confidence among US regional allies that Washington can protect them. It has also alienated traditional US allies who were blamed and then punished for failing to solve a problem they neither created nor could resolve.

The only positive is that Trump’s brief experiment with military adventurism, an aberration even within his own muddled political trajectory, may now be ending.



file-20260507-57-5rlspv.jpg
 

Trump Is ‘Bored’ With the War He Started



He wants out.

Trump really, really wants the war with Iran to end. He has declared victory many times.

He has repeatedly extended his cease-fire deadlines instead of following through on his (sometimes-apocalyptic) threats.

Trump is tired of the war, which has proved far more difficult and lasted far longer than he had expected.

His party is warily watching rising gas prices and falling poll numbers.

He doesn’t want to be bogged down in a Middle East conflict like some of his predecessors were.

He doesn’t want it to upend his high-stakes summit next week in China.

He is ready to move on.
 
Back
Top