Iran’s Strategic Victory

A billboard in downtown Tehran depicting Donald J. Trump with his lips stitched together in a symbolic illustration of the closed Strait of Hormuz. (Reuters)

For several days now, there have been rumors of a “deal” between Iran and the U.S. In diplomatic terms, there is no such thing as a deal. There are treaties, agreements, alliances, and a host of other official documents that exist under international law. In truth, the Trump administration calls the agreement a Memorandum of Understanding or MOU. A MOU — and this one is supposedly one page — is not how wars end. A MOU is more like a concept of a plan and in fact, this one calls for a continued ceasefire for sixty days while the actual terms are hammered out. One thing is for sure, Trump has no idea what he is doing and he is giving the word “deal” a bad connotation. Last Saturday Trump said they were close to an agreement. On Sunday he said that they were not close. On Monday we attacked targets in Iran, allegedly in self-defense, but contrary to the existing ceasefire. Then we learned that the negotiators have come to terms but as of this writing, neither the leadership in Iran nor Trump have agreed to it. Wednesday the two sides exchanged attacks.

It is hard to assess whether the U.S. achieved its strategic goals because they were never articulated, other than vague announcements that Iran must give up their “nuclear dust” (enriched uranium). Or was it his declaration that he would accept nothing less than Iran’s “unconditional surrender?” Or was it that he was going to select “acceptable” new leaders in Iran — regime change? Or was it to destroy all of their ballistic missiles? (Intelligence assessments made public indicate Iran has about 70% of their arsenal intact.) Or was it “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again”? Or anything else that happens to pop into his head.

In my view, the Iranians scored a resounding strategic victory that puts the U.S. on its heels around the globe. Historically, this could be the turning point where the U.S. goes from being a global leader to becoming a regional power. It will be the end of American dominance enjoyed since the end of World War II. There are multiple reasons as to why we will look back on this war of choice as a disaster bigger than Viet Nam or Afghanistan.

What is in the agreement? As I write, that is unclear. Both the U.S. and Iran have publicly discussed different elements of the MOU and the parts do not often match. It appears that it will extend the current (almost) ceasefire for another sixty days. During those sixty days, talks would continue for a more permanent agreement. At some point, and right now it looks like after the sixty days, nuclear talks would begin as to the disposition of the Iranian program. There are very little specifics. The Strait of Hormuz, which was open before Trump initiated the conflict, would reopen. The U.S. blockade of the Gulf and Iranian ports would end. Additionally some sanctions against Iran would be lifted and some amount of frozen assets (pallets of money?) released. In other words, we will be worse off, Iran will be better off, after hostilities cease. President Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) hammered out with the P-5+1 (the five permanent members of the U.N Security Council plus Germany) and Iran to curtail Iran’s nuclear program was a much more fruitful and impactful agreement. Critically, that plan included intrusive inspectors to monitor compliance. Trump tore it up. The MOU makes no mention of inspectors which makes any discussion of the nuclear program meaningless unless inspectors are given unrestricted access.

As the talks progressed this week, out of nowhere, Trump invoked the Abraham Accords and demanded that all of the Muslim countries sign on as part of the MOU. The Abraham Accords are a series of agreements, brokered by the U.S. between Israel and Muslim and Arab majority states. Egypt and Jordan have had relations with Israel since 1979 and 1994 respectively. UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan have joined the Accords since 2020. Complicating the picture is Palestine. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states plus Pakistan and others will not establish diplomatic relations with Israel until the Israelis commit to a two state solution for the Palestinians. The Israelis, or more specifically Benjamin Netanyahu, refuses. Analysts speculate that Trump threw in that proposal to try and salvage what is going to clearly be a major failure on his part if the MOU goes forward. Should he stick to that requirement, it will prevent agreement on the MOU.

Remember that Israel is conducting military operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah, a proxy of Iran’s. Iran declared that fighting in Lebanon must be included in any settlement or ceasefire. Israel declared that Lebanon and Iran are two distinct issues and that any agreement with Iran does not include Lebanon. This is but one of many complicating factors preventing a permanent agreement and thus the MOU. Additionally, Netanyahu is against any agreement that does not eliminate Iran’s nuclear programs upfront, before the war ends.

One of the biggest lessons learned is the changing nature of warfare. If nothing else, Ukraine and now Iran have demonstrated that a militarily inferior nation can hold out against a much larger and better equipped nation. One big reason is drones. Clearly a Tomahawk surface to surface missile is a more powerful weapon than a relatively cheap drone. But warfare in the modern era is not just about who has the biggest guns. It is economic warfare as well as combat. We have a finite number of expensive precision offensive munitions and our defenses are finite and expensive. Iran can quickly and cheaply churn out a nearly unlimited supply of drones. Are cheap drones sufficient for today’s warfare? No. But if the future of warfare is drones, then Hegseth’s and Trump’s infatuation with a manly non-woke military is a distraction from what really counts. Trump and Hegseth want to take us back to the 1990s with big platforms like the Trump battleship or the F-47 stealth fighter (Trump thinks it is named after him as the 47th president). Those programs cost tens of billions of dollars. One Trump battleship is estimated to cost at least 20 billion dollars (while we are going back to the future, why not propel the ship with big, beautiful coal which Trump seems to want to use to power everything). For example, one Tomahawk missile costs about 2 million dollars launched from a multi-billion dollar platform manned by hundreds of sailors which does not include other costs such as maintenance, fuel, logistics and so on. One Iranian Shaheed drone costs about twenty thousand dollars. Are they terribly sophisticated? No. But when fired by the hundreds coming from multiple directions, some are going to get through, no matter how sophisticated the air defense system is — and our sophisticated air defense systems also use very expensive radars and missiles.

The American military uses drones but they are big expensive ones with a long logistical tail. For example, a set of four MQ-9 Reaper drones (also known as the Predator B — a long range, long endurance, remotely piloted aircraft) plus the ground control station and satellite link systems, cost about $30 million dollars. We have lost several to the Houthis and Iranians as well in operational accidents. Each F-22 Raptor (the current all weather stealth fighter aircraft) costs about 150 million dollars. None of the aircraft have been built since 2011 with only 187 total put into service. However, looking at the total program cost per aircraft (which includes research, development, and start up costs) it comes out to about 340 million dollars per plane. It costs about 70,000 dollars per flight hour to use one. You get the idea, our modern arsenal is expensive. The Pentagon claims that the war against Iran cost taxpayers about 30 billion dollars to date. Most economists estimate that the actual figure is around one trillion dollars when adding up the cost of the operations in theater plus damage to bases and equipment plus the long term replenishment of depleted stockpiles and the personnel involved. So far we have lost thirteen service members killed in action and about five hundred wounded. None of that includes the impact on our domestic economy.

We must also remember that one of the keys to our economy and our role in it is freedom of the seas. Iran now knows that it can control the Strait Hormuz regardless of any ceasefire or other agreement. That means they also control about 20% of the flow of the world’s oil, significant amounts of natural gas, fertilizer and other “must have” commodities. They will demand to be treated with respect or else they can threaten to disrupt the world’s economy and close it again. Or close it to those nations that are not friendly to them or otherwise refuse to meet Iranian demands. The rest of the world will have to deal with Iran or be prepared for threats to their economy. Iran is now a major player in the region and the world. Despite the Iranian navy “lying on the bottom” as Trump puts it, the U.S. could not keep the Strait open. We also were unable to provide the deterrence or protection we promised to our Gulf friends and allies in the region. Trump even threatened one of our strongest regional supporters. When asked this week about Oman working with Iran to control the Strait he said, “the Strait’s got to be open to everybody… nobody’s going to control it. We’re going to watch… over it… Oman will behave like everybody else or we’ll have to blow ‘em up.” Very reassuring. 

Trump bullies and shouts, but in the end, what does he really talk about? Venezuela, Cuba, Greenland, Canada, Mexico, and other Western Hemisphere nations. He mocks NATO, our strongest allies ever, and refuses to commit to their defense. Where does that leave us? We are fast losing our status as a world power and are becoming a regional power. Russia, and especially China, are ready to fill the void.

All for what?