With the United States and Iran now clearly back to “war” from “ceasefire,” we’re seeing a host of stories arguing that President Trump, despite all his promises, has found his own “forever war.” It’s a tempting claim, especially for Trump’s critics. But we shouldn’t jump too easily into it without recognizing how profoundly different the situations are. For the United States, Iraq and Afghanistan were fundamentally occupations. In both cases, existing governments were rapidly shattered or melted away. The U.S. began occupations in which it stood up new, friendly governments which it hoped would eventually be able to stand on their own with the pro-U.S. friendliness intact. The U.S. eventually tired of the conflicts and withdrew its forces. Mostly.
The present situation is entirely different. The Iranian government is wholly intact and continues to fight the U.S. in an asymmetric but still conventional manner. Early U.S. hopes that the shock of the conflict would lead the Iranian government to crumble were quickly dashed. The U.S. has made no effort overthrow the Iranian government by force or even to occupy any of its territory. Even now, with the two sides back in active conflict, there is little evidence that the new attacks have any strategic goal beyond inflicting pain to shape some future negotiation. Both sides appear to be inflicting damage and pain with the hope that the other side will relent, soften their negotiating position or give up, but with little evidence either will.
The basic situation does not appear to have changed in five months. The U.S. started the conflict thinking the Iranian government would either rapidly fall or quickly submit. But it didn’t. And critically, Iran quickly demonstrated a more powerful deterrent against the U.S. than the U.S. had against Iran: controlling or at least menacing the Strait of Hormuz. Trump had ruled out in advance the kinds of very costly and dangerous means it would take to force the matter: an actual all-out invasion and occupation of Iran which would replace the government itself. With that off the table, the U.S. was essentially out of options.
The U.S. lost the conflict in its first hours or days. But Trump wasn’t willing to accept that reality. So we’ve been in a standoff ever since where Trump tries to finesse the matter or come up with some process that hides this basic fact — ceasefires to find a way to the negotiating table, memoranda of understanding which both sides can agree to because they don’t actually say anything. Over time, these efforts to freeze the conflict break down because Trump’s having lost the battle so comprehensively breaks through the subterfuge. So he starts hurling missiles again. Or Iran attacks or stops a few ships. Things break. People are killed. But it doesn’t change the underlying dynamic. Trump got nothing. Iran dictates the situation because they have a hold on the world economy by their ability to control oil shipments.
The earlier conflicts were ones in which the U.S. could mostly sustain its friendly government by remaining in place but couldn’t leave because doing so would mean it would all fall apart. They were permanent occupations, sustainable so long as the U.S. never left. There’s simply no analog to this in the current situation. If anything, continuing the conflict keeps the global economy under severe strain.
It’s certainly possible that the two sides will eventually find some way to get out of active conflict. No conflict actually lasts forever. Despite its strong hand, Iran has seen a lot of its industrial infrastructure destroyed. So it’s not like it’s suffering no pain or harm. But to the extent the conflict continues, it’s probably more apt to call it a “forever negotiation” — albeit with a lot of bombing and drones and airstrikes — than a “forever war.” Because the military verdict is in and has been since early March at the latest. The U.S. couldn’t defeat Iran through the kinds of military force it was willing to use, and Iran could dictate U.S. actions and those of much of the world by using the lever of the Strait of Hormuz. Just as important, the U.S. is on a much tighter timelines to end things than Iran. High oil prices and the impending midterm elections are a situation Trump can’t really abide. They were able to call his bluff rather than vice versa.
Everything we’ve seen since early March is defined by those parameters. Trump lost the conflict in those first days of March. Everything since is watching to see what he’ll do about it or when he’ll admit that’s what happened.