What if the war isn't going as Trump predicted?
Before dropping the first bombs on Tehran, the Pentagon conducted military and political calculations, issuing a forecast: the war in Iran would last four weeks. These calculations, agreed upon with President Trump, They defied a historical norm: it is easy to start a war and difficult to end it. Albert Camus defined it with more sophisticated literature: "When a war breaks out, people say that this cannot last, that it is too stupid. And, undoubtedly, a war is obviously too stupid, but that does not prevent it from lasting. Stupidity always persists." The Plague1947.
"The war will last as long as necessary," Trump corrected himself a week ago, in his first appearance after his fury against the ayatollahs. He backtracked again this Monday: "The war is practically over." The constant plot twists—a Trump specialty, of course—are not a good sign in politics, and even less so in military doctrine. The United States still has time to finish the job in four weeks—only ten days have passed—but the first alarm bells are ringing in Washington. What if the war isn't going as the president and the Pentagon calculated?
Despite the momentous death of Supreme Leader Khamenei, The Iranian regime is still alive, bombing with considerable effectiveness and shaking the global economy. Tehran had spent decades preparing to survive a US attack, and the appointment of Khamenei's son as supreme leader is a defiant message to Washington: Iran will fight before bowing to the demands of the Republican, who wanted to participate in the selection process. The regime's strategy seems clear: prolong and spread the war as much as possible to put the White House in an increasingly uncomfortable position. No one, except Israel, wanted the war. The emerging economies of the Gulf countries feared it as much as the increasingly divided Europeans, drawn into the conflict. Stock markets around the world plummeted, and the price of oil surpassed $100 a barrel, its highest value since the summer of 2022. year of the start of another ill-calculated war: the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
"Is Trump's war against Iran stupid?" Camus might ask today. Most Americans seem to think so. Only 27% of the population supports it. Recent polls say Trump would lose the November midterm elections with 44% of the vote, compared to 56% for the Democrats. Boom. The Washington press suggests that the administration is improvising and that, in the White House, doubts are growing about the exorbitant costs of an offensive that seems to have been commissioned by and for Netanyahu.
The Iranian operation is the riskiest that Trump has launched in his two terms. The ultimate goal remains unclear because the official version of the Republican administration has been changing. The prevailing interpretation is that the United States wants, above all, to overthrow the regime and transform it into a form that suits the interests of Washington and Tel Aviv in the region. But the history of wars—that is, of humanity— evidence that is usually needed boots on the ground (troops on the ground) To achieve such lofty goals, is Trump willing to break the taboo and send American troops to Iran? Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth admitted that this is a scenario that cannot be ruled out, and US intelligence reports conclude that a ground offensive would be necessary to topple the ayatollahs. So far, eight US soldiers have died in the Iranian operation with the Hollywood-esque name: Operation Epic Fury. Sending troops would plunge us into a much more unpredictable situation. The gamble would also mean more American deaths in the Middle East, a national trauma.
Before taking such risks, the Pentagon will have to recalculate its military and, above all, political positions. And Trump, pressured by the prospect of the November elections, could declare the war over at any moment and present himself to the public as the victor for having decapitated the regime and damaged—to an unknown extent—the Iranian nuclear program. But that approach could also backfire electorally. Basically, because it will be hard to believe. How would Trumpian propaganda justify it after Trump himself verbalized that he wants "the unconditional surrender of Iran"?? He New York Times He explained that, before the attack, US generals warned Trump that Tehran is not Caracas and that the risks of a long – or dead-end – war were palpable.
The problem is the Fifth Avenue syndrome in New York, a good metaphor for the current geopolitical moment.“I could stand on Fifth Avenue and start shooting people and I’m sure I wouldn’t lose any voters,” Trump said in 2016, in the midst of his campaign, when he had never been president. In the last year, the Republican has bombed seven countries. America First now has as little foundation as his Nobel Peace Prize candidacy—which, by the way, is best not to dismiss. However the war progresses, the conclusion is already painful: the world is now Trump’s Fifth Avenue; Putin’s Tverskaya Avenue; Netanyahu’s Rothschild Avenue; and it may soon be Xi Jinping’s Chang’an Avenue. What avenue do we Europeans have?
