President Donald Trump's ongoing war against Iran remains unpopular both with the American public and with the international community. Now a new report reveals that experts are convinced the president's "rinse and repeat" approach to handling the conflict reveals that he lacks either a plan to win or a means of gracefully exiting.
"Foreign policy experts say the latest round of hostilities point to a reality that has become increasingly clear of Mr. Trump’s handling of the war: He has run out of options," reported by The New York Times' Erica L. Green on Wednesday. Green proceeded to interview Matthew Bartlett, a Republican strategist who worked in the State Department during Trump's first term.
“The strategy has been rinse and repeat, whether it’s rhetorical or kinetic action,” Bartlett told Green. “It’s been absolutely shocking how the United States has been exposed for a lack of a plan of engagement, and a lack of a plan to either win or exit this war.”
Bartlett also pointed out that Trump's repeatedly professed hope that the Iranian people might take over the government exposes the fact that he has no strategy for winning the conflict with the American military.
“When you get to the bottom,” he added, “you go back to the top of the ladder of engagement.”
In addition to Bartlett, a top think tank scholar pointed out that Trump's actions in Iran reveal that he planned on prevailing through the use of overwhelming raw power when the situation on the ground is more complicated.
“The U.S. has demonstrated its capacity, and that it continues to have one of the most effective militaries in the world,” Michael Froman, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, told Green. “I think the challenge is this asymmetric warfare — where we do have the most effective military in the world, but smaller powers with far less capacity, strategically deployed, could still wreak havoc and make it difficult for us to achieve 100 percent of our objectives.”
Green elaborated on exactly how Trump's foreign policy moves in Iran have tipped his hand and revealed the weakness of the cards he is playing.
"The post followed a 24-hour stretch during which Mr. Trump’s by-now familiar playbook for the conflict was on full display," Green wrote. "The president went from boasting that Iran was defeated militarily, a 'failed nation' in economic disarray, to threatening an apocalyptic attack that would leave “very little left” of the country after it had defied his declarations and demands."
She added, "By Wednesday morning, as Iran and the United States assessed the damage of the most recent attacks, Mr. Trump was back to trolling the country on social media, asking his followers whether the United States should name the Strait of Hormuz the 'Trump Strait.' Foreign policy experts say the latest round of hostilities point to a reality that has become increasingly clear of Mr. Trump’s handling of the war: He has run out of options."
Speaking to AlterNet in April, an expert economist noted that the ongoing war is exerting pressure on the American people because — by closing the Strait of Hormuz — Iran has exacerbated America's pre-existing inflation problem.
“I would guess that yes, destruction of Iranian (and some other) energy facilities in the Persian Gulf area will have at least a medium-term effect keeping prices for crude oil and chemical fertilizer high, and that in turn means gasoline prices may come down only slowly,” Dr. Ed Gresser, Vice President and Director for Trade and Global Markets at the Progressive Policy Institute, told AlterNet. “Same for other petroleum-based products such as plastics, skin creams, and so on. The high potential of conflict also adds risk premiums to shipping and other costs.”
He continued, “Longer-term, lots of open questions. One is whether the administration will really concede that Iran has a right to close the Strait of Hormuz and assess tolls on shipping passing through it. That would make the smaller Gulf monarchies and to some extent Iraq reliant on Iranian good will for all of their exports. Likewise, Asian countries are the main buyers of Persian Gulf energy, and their supplies would be much less secure.”