As the war in Iran persists and President Donald Trump has postponed new strikes, a Middle East expert tells Military.com that the ongoing military operation could last “months, if not years.”
Trump on Monday made a series of threats and remarks regarding Iran amid continued failed negotiations. He started the day by correlating the United States’ ongoing attempts for a peace deal to the hypothetical reaction it would receive by the “Fake News Media,” specifically mentioning “The Failing New York Times, The China Street Journal (WSJ!), Corrupt and now Irrelevant CNN” when mentioning that Iran “wildly waving the white flag” would lead to the media claiming Iranian victory.
After saying “the clock is ticking” on a peace deal, Trump told the New York Post on Monday that Iran knows “what’s going to be happening soon,” adding he’s “not open” to any concessions for Tehran due to how recent negotiations fell through.
He also went on Truth Social and said he told Pentagon leaders that the U.S. “will NOT be doing the scheduled attack of Iran tomorrow [Tuesday].” Rather, he said he told them “to be prepared to go forward with a full, large scale assault of Iran, on a moment’s notice, in the event that an acceptable Deal is not reached.”
On Tuesday, Trump told reporters at the White House that he was “an hour away” from deciding to strike Iran, adding, “We were all set to go.”
‘Months, If Not Years’
Gregg Roman, executive director of the Middle East forum, told Military.com that the war played in the background as Trump “had to keep his powder dry” during his recent visit to China to meet with counterpart Xi Jinping.
That trip ultimately opened the door to more questions, including about the United States’ defense of Taiwan. But there was a lack of cohesion when it came to Iran.
“Now that ship has sailed,” Roman said. “[Trump] being able to turn back his attention wedged between two other issues—the midterm elections and primary season—right now gives him a window of opportunity, at least politically, to make it palatable to perhaps resume limited strikes after [Tuesday’s] primaries through June.”
“But frankly, no one knows what he’s going to do,” Roman added. “One has to assess what he’s saying on social media, what his advisors are saying at press conferences, the current force posture of the United States—at least in terms of its maritime blockade or counter blockades to the Strait of Hormuz.”
Asked how long he foresees U.S. military personnel in Iran, Roman said it could last “months, if not years.”
Strait of Hormuz as Iranian Weapon
The war started Feb. 28 when the U.S. and Israel launched joint strikes debilitating not just the region and Iranian military forces, but killing Iranian leaders.
An effort initially aimed to quickly force the new Iranian leadership to the negotiating table, as part of a broader peace agreement and nuclear framework, went sideways once Iran began using the Strait of Hormuz—a shipping channel carrying roughly 20-25% of the world’s oil—as an economic crutch against the U.S.
As a result, national gas prices continue to rise—elevating from an average of $4 per regular gallon one month ago, to $4.53 per gallon on Tuesday, according to AAA.
Roman said “there’s going to be a point,” even potentially as soon as this week, that Trump doesn’t see “significant progress or any progress at all being made in negotiations.”
He believes that could lead to an order of a resumption of strikes, though not at the level seen back in March.
Trump a ‘Wild Man’
Roman was asked whether Trump’s public rhetoric regarding the war, such as pledging “annihilation” of Iran or posting multiple statements daily on Truth Social about operations, could negatively impact the U.S. in ongoing negotiations.
“No, I don’t,” Roman said. “I actually think that it shows that the Iranians have to deal with an individual who has the potential to be a wild man. I don’t mean that in the pejorative sense; I mean that the less that the Iranians are able to predict what the president is going to do, the more likely it is to disturb their negotiating position.”
He’s not trying to be slick, he’s not trying to be some sort of consummate diplomat. He’s a man who holds raw power and knows how to wield it. And if it keeps the Iranians off their base, it’s for the betterment of the country.
But as Roman pointed out, that topsy-turvy nature can be disconcerting towards allies who don’t necessarily know how to deal with the president.
It’s about protecting U.S. security interests in the region, Roman said, so Trump should be based on actions instead of words.
Trump-Xi Fallout
The fallout of the Trump-Xi meeting can also have major implications.
Roman believes the Chinese “are probably the country greatest affected” by the situation in the Strait of Hormuz. The Japanese rely on Qatari liquid natural gas, for example, and the Emiratis now have to shift their pipeline capacity from previously going out through Abu Dhabi, not going out through Fujairah. Omanis have been affected by this as well, he said.
Also, Roman notes, the more long-term infrastructure investments that the Emiratis and the Saudis are making to export their oil west rather than going through the Persian Gulf are paying bigger dividends.
“So, when I think about it, the Chinese have an interest in ending this [war] because they’ll re-secure their incredibly inexpensive energy supply that they were able to get a sweetheart deal from the Iranians for,” Roman said. “And if anything, in the long term, the U.S. benefits because it directs more individuals to buy American oil and Venezuelan oil, which America effectively has hegemony over right now.”
There’s also a difference between short- and long-term plays for China, he added. That means the Chinese capitulating in the present while seeking to re-arm Iran in the future.
He also believes those Persian Gulf nations, specifically Arab countries, will work to avoid transporting oil through the gulf over time.
Americans’ Patience Running Thin
American sentiment has been quite strong on what is happening in the Middle East, at least according to recent polling.
A New York Times/Siena poll published Monday showed just 30% of respondents calling Trump’s decision to go to Iran as “the right decision.”
An NPR/PBS News/Marist poll published May 6 showed approximately 60% of roughly 1,320 respondents disapproving of Trump’s handling of the situation in Iran.
Roman said the security risks outweigh temporary economic pains, but that ideology has to come with a formidable message. The Trump administration has not been able to properly convey that sentiment.
“The economic effects are a ripple, but nothing compared to the mushroom cloud of an Iranian nuclear weapon,” Roman said. “I think the president realizes he’s in his last term. As he said, it’s an issue that’s been plaguing the country for the past 47 years, and frankly, not just the country, the rest of the region.
“He’s thinking strategically while everyone is just thinking about what’s happening at the end of the week. But sometimes, it’s hard to convince an American voter that because gas prices are high this week, they’ll be secure for a generation. He has to be able to articulate that message.”
Officials within the Trump administration should be shaping that message, he added, that goes beyond Truth Social posts and even press conferences.
Ultimately, it’s the Iranian regime and their people that need to be convinced.
Read the full article here