Iran Beats US & Israeli Missile Defenses by Exploiting Their Weaknesses
Sputnik – 22.03.2026
Iran carried out missile strikes on Israeli towns of Dimona and Arad on March 21.
Air defense systems like THAAD and Iron Dome may be highly capable but they still struggle with combined missile and drone attacks from multiple directions, Imad Salamey, associate professor at the Lebanese American University, tells Sputnik.
“The vulnerability exposed here is not a single system failure, but the limits of even advanced layered defenses when overwhelmed by scale, coordination, and mixed attack profiles,” he explains in the wake of Iranian strikes against Dimona and Arad.
The cost of US missile defenses’ failure
The exposed weakness of the US missile defenses carries significant strategic implications for the Middle East, Salamey notes, as such weapons are widely used to protect US assets across the region.
The US opponents now see that missile and drone tech offer a cost-effective way to fight “technologically superior opponents” while the United States could be forced to reassess its force posture and “invest in more integrated defense architectures.”
What Iran’s control of Israeli airspace could mean
If Iran shows that it can strike high-value targets in Israel repeatedly, it would shift the dynamics of this conflict, Salamey adds. By thus imposing higher costs on Israel and compounding its “freedom of action,” Iran may either push the conflict toward either escalation or “toward indirect negotiation, as both sides weigh the rising risks and diminishing returns of continued attacks.”
Report: White House Making ‘Detailed Preparations’ for Invasion of Iran
By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | March 22, 2026
Sources speaking with CBS News said that military commands submitted specific requests to prepare for a ground invasion of Iran.
The US deployed a second Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) to the Middle East last week, the sources explained. The USS Boxer will join the USS Tripoli in the region for a potential ground invasion of Iran. The Department of War is also preparing to deploy portions of the 82nd Airborne.
Axios reported on Friday, speaking with sources who said President Donald Trump is considering an occupation or blockage of Iran’s Kharg Island. The oil facilities on the island, which is located 15 minutes from the mainland in the Persian Gulf, handle 90% of Iran’s oil exports.
“He wants Hormuz open. If he has to take Kharg Island to make it happen, that’s going to happen. If he decides to have a coastal invasion, that’s going to happen. But that decision hasn’t been made,” a senior administration official told the outlet.
Trump is also threatening to escalate attacks on Iran’s power plants if Tehran does not reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The Islamic Republic said it will respond with strikes on civilian infrastructure across the region and the complete closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
Israel’s military chief Eyal Zamir said that the war was at its “halfway point.” On Saturday, an Iranian missile hit Dimona, the city where Israel bases its secret nuclear weapons program. Following the attack, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said the US and Israel would “intensify” and “significantly increase” their strikes on Iran in the coming week.
US Air Defenses Not Suited for Modern Combat — Ex-Air Force Officer
Sputnik – 22.03.2026
The US defenses are “bloated” in Israel, while also spread across the Gulf countries to protect American bases, so they can’t intercept all the Iranian drones and missiles, former colonel of Pakistan’s Air Force Sultan M. Hali tells Sputnik, commenting on recent Iran’s strikes against Dimona and Arad.
“US defense systems… are mostly 20th Century defense systems. What Iran is using is the 21st Century systems for which the Americans and the Israelis were not prepared,” he says.
Iran is launching volleys of drones and missiles simultaneously, which overwhelms Israeli defense systems like the Iron Dome, David’s Sling, Arrow, and THAAD, the expert explains.
Another aspect is that the IRGC missiles use low or evasive trajectories to exploit the blind spots of Israeli radars, he adds.
“Even advanced systems, they struggle against massed coordinated attacks, especially when the attackers combine cheap drones with precision missiles,” Hali says.
The effects of Iran getting limited dominance over Israeli skies can be divided into three points, he explains.
Psychological effect — Iran proved it can penetrate Israeli defenses, which undermines Israel’s deterrence and enhances Iranian negotiations position.
Operational leverage — Israel is forced to relocate its resources to defense instead of offensive actions.
Conflict trajectory shift — Israel will try to hit Iran harder to retaliate, but should expect to face high costs.
Iran’s Dimona Strike Shatters Myth of ‘Impenetrable’ THAAD, Patriot & Arrow Air Defenses – Analyst
Sputnik – 22.03.2026
Iran’s huge leap in missile capability allowed it to punch through Israel’s vaunted multi-layered air defense shield, says political science and international relations expert Dr. Simon Tsipis. That explains why several warheads in Iran’s retaliatory strike on Dimona, home to Israel’s nuclear research facility shielded by Israeli and US defenses, reached their target area, Dr. Simon Tsipis tells Sputnik.
According to the analyst:
- Attack exposed weaknesses of Israel’s Iron Dome, built to intercept short-range rockets and mortars – not Iran’s intermediate-range ballistic missiles
- Iran’s military capabilities now allow it to launch ballistic missiles at ranges exceeding 2,000 km — including Diego Garcia joint US-UK military base
- Iran employs saturation tactics, launching swarms of decoys like drones and low-caliber missiles to overwhelm defensive systems before the main missile strikes
“Until now, it had been assumed that Iranian missiles would lose momentum and speed at the limits of their range. It is now evident that they retain significant power and velocity during the terminal phase of flight,” says the pundit.
The geopolitics expert breaks down the brutal US/Israel reputational damage:
- While Iran has just burnished its credentials as a serious military power, arms buyers everywhere are taking note of Arrow, Patriot, and THAAD failures
- Iran’s claimed airspace dominance puts US bases on notice worldwide, while bringing much of Europe within Iran’s missile range
The sheer reach of Iran’s new arsenal deals a humiliating blow to Israeli intelligence, which had long insisted it knew every detail of Iran’s capabilities
“Clearly, hidden breakthroughs went undetected,” he says.
In Dr.Tsipis’ opinion, Iran likely chose not to score a direct hit on Dimona’s nuclear reactor to avoid escalation. But it has sent a clear message: “Israel’s most heavily guarded site lies within striking range of Iranian systems.”
Iran retaliation shakes helium, global tech supply chains
Al Mayadeen | March 22, 2026
The Associated Press on Sunday reported that Iranian strikes on US-linked gas infrastructure in Qatar is now threatening to disrupt not only global energy markets, but also key technology supply chains, due to the role Qatar plays in helium production.
The strikes come in direct response to the earlier targeting of Iran’s own energy sector, particularly the attack on the South Pars gas field, the country’s largest and most strategic source of natural gas. Iranian officials had warned that any attempt to hit its economic infrastructure would be met with reciprocal measures across the region, signaling a shift toward targeting energy assets tied to the broader war effort.
Qatar, which shares the same gas reservoir with Iran, became part of this escalation, with strikes on Ras Laffan reflecting a deliberate mirroring of earlier attacks on Iranian facilities.
Helium shock
The Gulf state supplies roughly a third of the world’s helium, a gas that, despite its everyday image, is essential for advanced industries, including semiconductor manufacturing, medical imaging, and space launches.
Production was halted earlier this month at the US-linked Ras Laffan facility after attacks on energy infrastructure, with further strikes this week causing what officials described as extensive damage. Qatar’s state-owned energy company has since warned that helium exports will be reduced by around 14 percent.
“It makes the story worse,” Phil Kornbluth, president of Kornbluth Helium Consulting, told AP. “Your best-case scenario would be you’re back producing some helium in six weeks or something like that. As it looks right now, that’s highly unlikely.”
Prices surge
Prices have already begun to rise, with spot rates doubling since the crisis began. While most helium is sold through long-term contracts, analysts say sustained disruption could push those prices higher as well.
“There’s lots of room for price increase if this is an extended outage,” Kornbluth said.
The impact has not yet fully reached global markets, largely because shipments sent before the escalation are still arriving. But that buffer is expected to run out within weeks.
“Nobody’s run out of helium yet. But it’s a few weeks out when the shortage really hits,” he added.
Chips under pressure
The implications are particularly serious for the semiconductor sector. Helium is used during chip production to regulate temperature, especially in the etching phase, where maintaining consistent cooling is critical.
“You really want to maintain a constant temperature over the wafer. And in order to do that, you need to be able to draw heat away from the wafer that’s being processed,” said Jacob Feldgoise, an analyst at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology. “Helium is an excellent thermal conductor. And so chip fabs will blow helium over the back of the wafer in order to speed heat removal and keep heat removal consistent.”
There is currently no viable substitute for helium in this process.
Beyond chipmaking, helium is also used to cool MRI machines and in rocket fuel systems, making it a key resource across both medical and aerospace sectors.
Supply chain strain
The situation is further complicated by transport constraints. Liquid helium must be stored in specialized containers that can only hold it for a limited time before it begins to escape. Around 200 of these containers are currently stuck in the region, slowing efforts to stabilize supply.
“It’s going to take a fair amount of time to get these containers out of Qatar and to get them somewhere else where they might be able to be filled with helium,” Kornbluth said. “So this initial period when you lose Qatar supply and have to rejig the supply chain and reposition containers, that’s going to be the worst part of the shortage most likely.”
With few alternative producers and Russian exports restricted by sanctions, options for replacing Qatar’s supply remain limited. Asian manufacturers, particularly in South Korea, are seen as especially exposed due to their reliance on Qatari helium.
“Even disruptions affecting just a handful of materials could destabilize the entire semiconductor manufacturing process as each stage of production depends on the previous one,” said Jong-hwan Lee, a professor at Sangmyung University.
Still, analysts say a complete supply collapse is unlikely. In the event of shortages, helium is typically redirected toward critical sectors such as healthcare and chip production, where demand is hardest to replace.
But the situation points to how quickly a regional escalation can ripple through global industries, exposing vulnerabilities far beyond the immediate battlefield.
Iran’s strike on Dimona – Israel’s nuclear weapons research center – shows Israeli air defences are weakened
The Dissident | March 21, 2026
The War In Iran has seriously escalated in recent days with Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities, and a retaliatory Iranian strike on Dimona, the Israeli city housing its secret Nuclear Weapons development centre .
Israel struck a nuclear enrichment site in Natanz, Iran, and in response, Iran struck, Dimona, in what was apparently a strike targeting the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center located just outside of the city.
For Iran, the fact that an Iranian missile was able to get through such an important strategic area means that Israel is effectively “defenseless”.
After the strike, one Iranian speaker of the parliament said:
If the Israeli regime fails to intercept the missiles in the highly protected Dimona area, it is operationally a sign of entering a new phase of the battle:
Israel’s skies are defenseless.
As a result, it seems the time has come to implement the next pre-designed plans.
Happy Nowruz to the Iranian nation.
Journalist Glenn Greenwald noted that , “Dimona is one of the most strategically important places in Israel” adding that, “If Israel can’t even intercept Iranian missiles aimed there, that is an obvious sign of the serious weakening of their air defenses”.
Indeed, Dimona is no doubt seen as a deeply strategically important place to Israel, given that it, as Middle East Eye noted , “sits near one of the most sensitive locations in Israel: the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center, long linked to Israel’s undeclared nuclear weapons programme.”
Journalist Seymour Hersh in his 1991 book, “The Samson Option: Israel’s Nuclear Arsenal and American Foreign Policy”, detailed the history of Israel’s secret Nuclear program at the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center and the efforts Israel went to in order to hide the facility from then U.S. president JFK, including by creating a “false control room … at Dimona, complete with false control panels and computer-driven measuring devices that seemed to be gauging the thermal output of a twenty-four-megawatt reactor (as Israel claimed Dimona to be) in full operation” in order to “convince the (American) inspectors that no chemical reprocessing plant existed or was possible.”
Hersh added that, “One former Israeli official recalled that his job was to interpret for the American team. ‘I was part of the cover-up team. One of the engineers would start talking too much’ in front of the Americans, the official said, and he would tell him, in seemingly conversational Hebrew, ‘Listen, you mother-fucker, don’t answer that question.’ The Americans would think I was translating.’”
Hersh went on to report that, “Sometime early in 1968, Dimona finally was ordered into full-scale production and began turning out four or five warheads a year — there were more than twenty-five bombs in the arsenal by the Yom Kippur War in September 1973”.
The Israeli nuclear program was used to advance the Israeli “Samson Option” doctrine, which as journalist Kit Klarenberg described, is “if the (Israeli) entity feels sufficiently threatened, it reserves the right to carry out preemptive nuclear strikes not merely on regional adversaries, but its Western sponsors into the bargain.”
Israeli military theorist Martin van Creveld, talking about the Samson option in 2003, said, “We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force” adding, “We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.”
Today, “the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute included Israel in its list of nuclear-armed states in June 2025 and assessed that Israel possesses more than 80 nuclear warheads.”
Given Dimona city’s proximity to the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Centre, and its importance to Israel’s Samson option doctrine, there is no doubt that it is viewed as a strategically important area for Israel, and the fact that an Iranian missile went through shows that Israel’s air defence has been severely weakened.
Role reversal – “divide & conquer” used against the west
Ashes of Pompeii | March 21, 2026
For centuries, the strategy of “divide and conquer” has been a cornerstone of Western geopolitical power. The British Empire mastered the art of ruling vast territories with minimal forces by exploiting internal divisions, setting local leaders against one another, leveraging ethnic tensions, and securing cooperation through selective incentives (aka bribes). The United States later employed similar tactics, from Cold War interventions to coalition-building in Iraq and Southeast Asia. The principle remains consistent: fracture opposition to maintain advantage.
Today, we are witnessing a role reversal in real time. Iran, long subjected to Western pressure and sanctions, is employing a parallel strategy regarding the Strait of Hormuz. Much of the west is not entirely enamoured of Trump’s Iran strategy but is afraid to openly challenge America. The closing of the Strait is economically catastrophic for most US allies and they are caught between a rock and a hard place – a vindictive Trump demanding support to open the Strait, and economic hardship.
In steps Iran with its own “divide and conquer” strategy, now reportedly negotiating with individual Asian and European countries a sort of Hormuz toll to allow tankers from these allied countries to pass through. And of course, they would each be required to not support the the US Navy if it attempts to open Hormuz. These discussions would be regarding tolls, security guarantees, and bilateral arrangements that would circumvent a collective response.
This approach carries significant strategic implications. If key U.S. allies secure individual agreements ensuring their energy shipments, the incentive to support a unified, potentially confrontational effort to keep Hormuz open is dead in the water.. Why risk escalation when a separate deal preserves economic interests? This dynamic could gradually erode the cohesion of Western alliances. Imagine Japan, Korea or Germany putting their national interests ahead of America’s! Unthinkable just a few weeks ago.
Iran’s maneuvering reflects a calculated understanding of coalition politics. By offering tailored terms, Tehran exploits the very real economic dependencies that different nations have on Persian Gulf oil flows. A country like Japan, facing immediate energy shortfalls, may prioritize short-term access over long-term strategic solidarity.
The irony is substantive, not merely rhetorical: a regional power taking advantage of a strategy historically used to extend Western influence, now being adapted to counter that same influence. Traditional western asymmetric power dynamics being used against the west.
If Iran successfully institutionalizes a system of bilateral tolls or passage agreements, it could reshape regional power structures and perhaps challenge the precedent of freedom of navigation under international law. However, this development also exposes the conditional nature of the “rules-based order” itself. When international norms align with western strategic interests, they are vigorously defended; when they become inconvenient, exceptions are quietly made. The interesting aspect here, is that for once, the exception is used against the USA.
In the end, this is power politics, plain and simple. Iran is using the tools available to it, geography, energy dependence, and diplomatic patience, to turn a strategic vulnerability into leverage. The West built much of its influence by splitting opponents; now it faces the same tactic applied in reverse. One would expect that states would always seek national advantage where they find it, but that has often not been the case for “junior” members of the western alliance in the last 30 or 40 years.
This is just another step towards a multipolar world where the west is seeing its own playbook used against it, where alliances and coalitions may be less static, and where national interest may be considered more important than following the diktats of a hegemon or a bloc leader.
Turn around is fair play and America and the west will need to get used to the idea that other countries, here Iran, can both play hardball and use divide and conquer strategies.
I am not sure Donald Trump will quite understand the significance of this moment.
Iran signals upper hand as the US-Israeli war reaches third week
Al Mayadeen | March 21, 2026
Iran is signaling that it is winning and has the power to impose a settlement on Washington that would cement Tehran’s influence over Middle East energy resources for decades, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal. The WSJ notes that Iranian officials appear to see time as working in their favor, suggesting they are not in a rush to end hostilities.
Despite repeated US and Israeli claims of successfully targeting missile launchers and stockpiles, the WSJ reported that Iran has retained the capacity to fire dozens of ballistic missiles and a large number of drones daily across the region.
In fact, the rate of attacks has increased in recent days compared with 10 days ago. Iranian strikes reportedly inflicted severe damage this week on US-linked energy infrastructure in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates, while Iran’s own oil exports continued to flourish.
The WSJ added that shipping through the Strait of Hormuz remains contingent on Iranian permission, and that rising oil and gas prices are exerting pressure on the US administration to end the war.
Low-cost, high-impact disruptions
The Wall Street Journal cited analyst Dina Esfandiary, who said that Iran has learned it can inflict large-scale disruption at relatively low cost.
“The Iranians aren’t ready to end the war because they have learned an important lesson: They can, comparatively easily and cheaply, cause a lot of damage and disruption. They now want the whole world to learn that lesson, too,” she told the newspaper.
Iranian leaders appear to be leveraging this capability to set conditions for a ceasefire. As cited by WSJ, Esmail Rezaei, spokesman for the Iranian Parliament’s foreign affairs and defense committee, stated after a recent meeting with military commanders that any talks with the US are currently off the agenda, as Tehran “focuses on punishing the aggressors.” Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, has described Iran’s position in the war as comparable to Vietnam for the US.
The Wall Street Journal notes that Iran’s demands for ending the war reportedly include massive reparations from the US and its allies and the removal of American military forces from the region.
Iranian officials have also suggested transforming the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic international waterway, into an Iranian-controlled passage where ships would pay fees to transit.
Expediency Council member Mohammad Mokhber, advisor to the supreme leader on economic affairs, told Mehr News Agency that Iran intends to “turn its position from a sanctioned country to an enhanced power in the region and the world.”
US officials, experts, express doubt despite the facts
US officials and military experts, the WSJ reports, have expressed skepticism about the feasibility of such an arrangement, highlighting the difficulty of US decision-makers coming to terms with the demands at this stage.
Former White House special envoy Jason Greenblatt commented, “President Trump will never let them win. They don’t understand how far he’s willing to go.”
The WSJ also cited retired US Air Force Lt. Gen. David Deptula, who said that reopening the Strait of Hormuz would require careful intelligence and surveillance, but claimed that this could be achieved within weeks.
“It’s not something that is going to happen overnight, but over time the Strait of Hormuz will be open back to the levels of shipping that we saw before this conflict broke out. The Iranians are not going to end up with control over the strait, we are,” he claimed, according to the Wall Street Journal, revealing that a battle may be ahead for control of the strait.
Additional perspectives reported by the WSJ include Sanam Vakil of Chatham House, who described leaving Iran in control of the strait as “a categorical failure for the United States and President Trump,” and Robin Mills of Qamar Energy, who said that even if temporary control were granted to Iran, it would likely provoke renewed military or diplomatic action.
Have you heard the latest joke about Trump and Iran?
By Martin Jay | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 21, 2026
What’s the difference between Vietnam and the Iran War? Answer: Trump had an exit strategy for Vietnam.
How much collective responsibility can the West take for the shitstorm it is in now, otherwise known as ’The Iran War’? Many would like to blame most of it on Trump for being a manchild and just going ahead with the most madcap military venture NATO countries have ever known, against all the expert advice, and ending up with a regime which is even more hardcore for having a bomb, world energy prices soaring and causing chaos due to Iran choking the Straits of Hormuz, and the entire relationship between Washington and its allies in the region reduced to a handful of dust?
The reality is that Trump took the decision to go to war not based on one issue alone. Left-wing commentators in the U.S. would like us to think it was to distract the media away from the latest revelations of the DOJ and the Epstein files, which had a tome of evidence accusing him of having inappropriate relations with a 13-year-old girl. But there were other reasons which pushed him over the line. Top of that list is surely that Netanyahu was blackmailing him, threatening to release recordings of his phone calls with Epstein where they talk about young girls. Add to that, it was probably pointed out to him that he was not going to keep both houses when the midterms come unless a considerable amount of Jewish American money was pumped into his campaign.
But it isn’t just Trump that has got us all into this mess that we’re in. For decades, the EU allowed Israel to ratchet up their brutal occupation of Palestinians and in the process to dehumanize them, leading to the climax of the Gaza genocide. This gave an unrealistic sense of impunity, almost akin to a divine intervention to religious fanatics who already believed that they were the chosen people and that they had a right to murder those beneath them and steal their property. Look at the reaction of western governments and in particular the EU when the events of October 7th unfolded and how they supported any response at all from Israel. In fact, just look at how any UK government minister reacted to the start of the Iran War, which, if we didn’t know better, might have thought it was started by Iran.
Trump is isolated now not for his rank stupidity, or his delusional views about who he is and what America is. He is isolated by EU leaders as none of them want to be part of a new Vietnam War scenario which goes on for years and only produces body bags — only to keep a U.S. president from looking like a total fuckwit in front of his own people.
Yes, the reality is that the vast majority of Americans don’t really understand what Trump just did in Iran. Even today, something like 80 percent of Republicans polled agree with his decision to begin a conflict with Iran, while Democrats are in the other camp altogether, perhaps better informed of Trump’s rationale behind going ahead with the plan.
Most likely the plan had been on the table for months and each time a military expert pointed out the harsh realities of it bringing blowback on a global level, affecting not only pump prices rocketing but just about everything else over the longer term, they were ignored or swapped for a sycophant in a uniform who just nodded like a demented parcel shelf toy dog until he had a whole room full of them. Does the American public understand just how self-indulgent Trump has been and that he has now created for himself a new threat, like a magician pulling a pigeon out of his hat? While the so-called ’threat’ from Iran goes from being a vague, opaque notion which most people don’t even believe, to being something quite real and lucid to the point that, ironically, Trump can now present it to the gullible public and hope they don’t notice that he manufactured it all by himself.
Yet it is remarkable how detached Europeans are from Trump and his plans. What an extraordinary example of how diplomacy is entirely dead and not worth the paper it’s written on, when EU ambassadors had no clue about these meetings and what came out of them. Shouldn’t EU leaders have stepped in at some point and warned him he was playing with fire and that the only certainty was that the West was guaranteed to be the burn victim? What about our intelligence services? It is inconceivable they didn’t know what was coming? Did they not tip off their own governments? Likely they did and that London, Paris and Berlin simply did nothing, such is the non-existent special relationship between Old Europe and Washington. Even Britain.
Transatlantic relations between the U.S. and EU countries is never going to be the same again if something can’t be done to get a dialogue going. Sure, Trump may pull the U.S. out of NATO just out of spite, like a fuming four-year-old who’s just lost his ball to an angry neighbour, but other, bigger relations are probably burnt forever. Washington’s relations with Israel can never go back to the Master (Israel) Slave (U.S.) set-up. And America’s relations with Gulf Arab countries is going to be hard to put back on an even keel when Arab leaders can see how fake they were in the first place.
Trump’s childish revelation recently that he couldn’t have imagined Iran hitting the GCC countries feels like a seven-year-old boy trying to explain to a room full of adults that he didn’t realise that borrowing his friend’s go-kart would result in so much damage as no one told him the jalopy would go so fast down a hill. The EU has a similar idiot in power, though. Kaja Kallas, a name which conjures up a 1980s underarm deodorant or a Greek ferry company, is blessed by at least not looking as stupid as she really is. This daughter of an Estonian communist politician, who was happy to live the high life under the Soviets, seems to be almost entirely brain dead when she gets on the podium or in front of the six microphones (all of EU TV networks who are actually paid cash to broadcast her moronic ramblings) and harps on about Russia getting more money now from oil sales. It’s literally like watching someone in a mental institution who hasn’t taken their medication talking to the mirror with a toothbrush as a mic and trying to sound clever.
But it’s no joke how the West got to where it is with Iran, when these same buffoons for decades have been encouraging Israel to expand its ideas and, red in tooth and claw, reach a point today where they are either starving people so as to ethnically cleanse Gaza or simply bombing women and children in their tents — or taking over part of Lebanon, a decades-old fantasy which didn’t end well in 1982 when they tried it before.
So the Trump joke is less funny when you see it in the light of who led him to where he is and what his inconsistent messages are to EU leaders. He is stuck in the past and tends to be someone trying to correct or duplicate U.S. foreign policy. Of course, he lacks élan, though, which is also part of the problem with such leaders. In the early 70s, when Nixon wanted to devalue the dollar but retain its power around the world, EU leaders were horrified. Apparently, he simply said to them: “It’s our dollar, but it’s your problem.”
Trump signals possible wind-down of aggression against Iran despite unresolved Hormuz crisis
Press TV – March 21, 2026
US President Donald Trump has indicated he is considering scaling back the underway unprovoked aggression towards Iran, even as the crisis surrounding the Strait of Hormuz remains unresolved.
In a post on his Truth Social platform on Friday, Trump claimed the United States was close to achieving the military goals sought by the aggression.
“We are getting very close to meeting our objectives as we consider winding down our great Military efforts in the Middle East.”
He listed, what he called, degrading Iran’s missile capability and industrial base, and protecting US allies in the region.
The remarks flew in the face of the Islamic Republic’s robust underway retaliation, codenamed Operation True Promise 4, that keeps taking larger portions of hostile targets under the country’s firepower.
US military positions throughout the region, including in Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, have been subjected to sustained counterstrikes.
The retaliation has also struck sensitive and strategic locations across the occupied territories, including those lying in Tel Aviv, the holy occupied city of al-Quds, Haifa, Be’er Sheva, considered a technological hub, and the Negev Desert.
On the issue of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, which Iran has closed to enemy vessels as well as ships belonging to those cooperating with the adversaries since the onset of the aggression, Trump suggested the US might step back from direct responsibility.
“The Hormuz Strait will have to be guarded and policed, as necessary, by other Nations who use it — The United States does not.”
Commenting on the remarks, American outlet Axios acknowledged that efforts to reopen the strait have proven difficult.
It cited Trump’s advisors as pointing to his frustration due to limited allied support, despite his alleging military victory.
The US has sought to form a coalition to secure the strait, asking NATO allies and others to contribute naval and air assets. Most have declined to commit forces, and some have only backed a political statement supporting the effort.
Trump has retorted to allies over their reluctance, calling NATO countries “cowards” and saying that without US backing, NATO is “a paper tiger.”
Meanwhile, disruptions to global oil flows continue to drive up energy prices.
The American Fantasy of Iranian Surrender
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – March 21, 2026
What if the state that claims global military supremacy is now confronting a conflict it cannot win on its own terms?
President Trump’s repeated assertions that the US could defeat Iran and force it to surrender are now colliding with battlefield realities and geopolitical fissures that suggest otherwise. The very premise of a quick and decisive US victory is unravelling in real time, raising profound questions about American strategy, alliance cohesion, and power in a multipolar age.
The Illusion of Swift Victory in Tehran
President Trump’s pronouncements on Iran have been starkly ambitious. On multiple occasions he has touted rapid success and overwhelming military might in confronting Tehran — insisting that the US does not need British help to prevail and that Iranian forces will be “hit very hard.” Yet these claims increasingly look detached from both strategic reality and on‑the‑ground dynamics.
The US military doctrine has traditionally relied on superior air power and technological edge to achieve rapid dominance. In early March 2026, the Pentagon publicly stated that operations against Iran’s missile, air, and naval capabilities were underway, though officials stopped short of conceding a quick end to the campaign. But the timeline Trump once floated — nominally four to five weeks — has already blurred into ambiguity, with the White House acknowledging potential extensions and evolving objectives primarily because of the failure to achieve quick objectives. They thought that the assassination of Iran’s Supreme Leader would cause the regime to fall. That did not happen, forcing the US and Israel to rethink the nature and the duration of the campaign.
The expectation that air campaigns alone could cripple Iran’s military infrastructure — or compel unconditional political submission — misreads Tehran’s defensive resilience and strategic depth. A recent classified report from the US National Intelligence Council found that even large‑scale US use of force is unlikely to dismantle Iran’s entrenched political and military leadership. That insight undercuts the notion that a blitz of strikes can replace the complex sociopolitical calculus of regime transformation. The council’s document, drafted late last month, builds on work by the C.I.A. that assessed that a complete change of government was unlikely even if Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, was killed in a US-led military operation.
Iran’s responses have also defied Washington’s expectations. Despite extensive targeting, Iranian forces have not capitulated; they have continued missile and drone strikes on US and allied targets across the Gulf region. Rather than collapse, Tehran appears to be adapting, leveraging both conventional responses and strategic signaling to blunt American efforts and maintain a posture of deterrence. Reports in the Western media show significant Iranian success in repeatedly targeting US military bases. Taken together, these developments erode the core of the Trump administration’s confidence in quick, decisive military outcomes, thus setting the stage for a campaign that may extend far beyond initial projections without achieving strategic objectives. As such, President Trump has now stopped threatening “certain death” to Iran and its people.
Eroding Alliances and Strategic Overreach
A second blow to US fantasies is the fraying of Western and regional support that Trump and his advisers presumed would form the backbone of sustained operations. Trump’s suggestion that the US does not need British assistance belies deeper tensions within the transatlantic alliance over legal responsibility, operational strategy, and political backing for war.
Across Europe, capitals are deeply divided over the US-led escalation. Spain has resisted aligning its military fully with Washington’s campaign, and the US leadership has grappled with legal and planning complications related to base access, epitomizing a broader transatlantic unease over the wisdom and legitimacy of war with Iran. These disagreements have reduced the coherence of NATO‑era cooperation, complicating US expectations for collective action.
The US’ handling of Gulf states has also strained ties with regional partners. Officials in several Gulf kingdoms privately expressed frustration at the lack of prior notification before strikes on Iranian territory and at US reliance on Gulf air defenses to intercept Iranian missiles with limited American support. This undercuts longstanding assumptions about the reliability of regional alignments and may incentivize some states to hedge their security calculations.
Domestically, American public opinion is also shifting in ways that undermine unilateralist ambitions. Polling suggests historically weak support for the operation against Iran, with a significant portion of the public expressing opposition and frustration at the perceived readiness of U.S. forces to engage in protracted conflict. This internal division complicates political sustainment of a drawn‑out campaign, particularly given the toll of casualties and financial costs that would accrue over time. Collectively, these fissures — within alliances, among regional partners, and on the home front — highlight the weakening of America’s hegemonic posture and raise questions about its ability to marshal durable coalitions in pursuit of major strategic objectives.
A Crisis of America’s Own Making
The deeper problem is not Iran’s resilience or the alliance falling apart; it is the strategic trap Washington has walked into. According to testimony before Congress, Pentagon officials repeatedly warned that Tehran posed no imminent threat of attacking the US directly. Yet the Trump administration chose to escalate, interpreting cautious intelligence as justification for preemptive strikes and forceful posturing. The result is a war the US did not need to fight, at a cost that will reverberate far beyond the battlefield.
This miscalculation is more than a tactical error; it is a strategic misstep that is reshaping global perceptions of American power. Allies are questioning Washington’s judgment, adversaries are emboldened, and the credibility of US deterrence is being tested. The costs are not just measured in military engagements or financial outlays; they are being paid in influence, alliances, and leverage in other regions of the world. The campaign against Iran is eroding the very hegemonic posture the US has relied on since the end of the Cold War.
The longer the conflict drags on, the more entrenched this erosion becomes. The US now faces a geopolitical deadlock of its own making: a situation where victory is unlikely, withdrawal risks loss of prestige, and every subsequent action is constrained by the consequences of a war initiated without necessity. What started as an assertion of American strength may ultimately be remembered as a cautionary tale of overreach, misreading intelligence, and underestimating both the limits of force and the resilience of regional actors.
In short, the crisis is not just in Iran. Rather, it is in Washington itself. A nation confident in its global supremacy has stumbled into a conflict that threatens to unravel the assumptions underpinning that supremacy, leaving the US not just challenged militarily, but on a path to strategic downfall.
Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of international relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affair
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
