The Iran War was born on the promise of speed and clarity. Donald Trump He presented it as a “short-stop invasion,” a surgical operation to destroy Iran’s military and nuclear capabilities and bring stability to the region.
Two days later, the rhetoric is disturbingly reminiscent of another “special operation”: de Vladimir Putin in Ukraine, conceived as a mild coup and turned into a war of destruction without a clear horizon.
The issue is that the United States and Israel are fighting a military campaign until the president understands the type of conflict in which it is occurring.
As EL ESPAÑOL has suprayado, Trump is progressing at a bombing pace as well as the cases of his targets.
Primera, the end of the nuclear program.
Luego, the destruction of the army and missiles.
Later, a report of apoyo to affiliated militias of Tehran.
In parallel, the president coqueteaba with the “Caracas model” and the slogan “Make Iran great again”, suggesting regime change low cost which will preserve the armaments and energy flows of the state.
Now the message is different: the war will be short, Iran is “de-rotated” and the rest is a case of damage management.
This discursive elasticity seems to have been undermined by the Russian drift: an extremely limited operation that, in the face of enemy resistance and the completeness of the political terrain it extracts, redefines and justifies the brand.
The comparison with Putin is not capricious. The Kremlin has ensured that Kyiv will arrive every day by 2022.
Three years later, Russia is locked in a conflict that has militarized the economy, driven diplomacy and focused the future on a flexible but immovable front.
Trump insists that Iran “can no longer attack us” and that the balance is in Washington’s favor. But the defense minister calls for a “two-week” campaign and avoids expressing political sentiments.
The photo fills you with familiarity: clear military goals, dark political goals.
In Tehran, the language is reversed but the same as the language. Minister of Foreign Affairs Araghchi You’ve reached a certain level of fire that doesn’t mean a “permanent end” to the attack, and you promise to provide the “necessary time”.
The Revolutionary Guards respond that there is “no room” to address the problem of hostilities while the bombers continue.
This is the logic of long-term resistance: although the military infrastructure was devastated, the regime relied on it to survive in a bunker version, bolstering its nationalism, ranks of militias and the promise of a future arrival.
Putin also believed that over time Western will would erode. Time counts in Iran it will disturb the peace in democracies with bags of nerves and lost oil prices.
Meanwhile, the conditions of the defeated war are being discussed at the site. The coalition deployed much of Iran’s military and naval capabilities, but did not define exactly what “victoria” meant and develop a political path for the following day.
Realistic scenarios aim for a more authoritarian regime rebuilding There is internal fragmentation with the risk of civil war. In none of them does a minimally structured democratic transition appear at the moment.
And without a clear political goal, any military victory runs the risk of turning into a strategic one. I learned about the United States in Iraq and I seem to forget it now.
The most disturbing word of this new war is in the words of its protagonists. Trump swears he doesn’t have it nation building no extended employment, but at the same time he assumes he has “changed the regime” and the public imagination to influence the choice of the next supreme leader.
They promise to get to the bottom of it, but don’t define what resistance specifically means beyond causing costs and keeping the cause alive.
Israel calls for existential comfort and the creation of “conditions” for the Iranian people to rise to the east, explaining how selective bombing is transitioning into a new, stable order.
They are maximalist narratives with minimalist agendas.
All of this is also happening as the Rim of Hormuz is semi-blocked, Brent prices are crossing all-time highs, and Europe and Asia are entering a conflict they have not decided. Each passing day of war brings clouds of uncertainty to the markets and prompts the temptation for military solutions in other theaters.
Trump is not as enthralled as Putin. There are no terrestrial tropics or a mobile economy in Russia.
But the mechanisms that turned the “special operation” in Ukraine into an endless war (changing targets, triumphant propaganda, lack of strategic strategy, disdain for ads from allies and experts) are now at risk in the Iranian case.
If the White House does not immediately define exactly what it wants in this war, when it is willing to pay for it and when it considers its mission accomplished, it risks turning the “short trip” into a sinless journey.
Leave a Reply