WASHINGTON (Realist English). President Donald Trump, elected for a second term on a platform of ending “endless wars” in the Middle East, may find himself drawn into a conflict that increasingly resembles the very “forever war” he promised to conclude.
A sixth consecutive night of airstrikes on Iranian targets, the expansion of the campaign to civilian infrastructure, and the absence of clear objectives are leading analysts to speak of a repetition of the mistakes made in Iraq and Afghanistan.
As CNN notes, “with Iran, Trump appears to be heading into the midterm elections with his own self‑inflicted endless war — a ‘forever war lite.’ It is a conflict with an uncertain rationale, shifting goals, and fading domestic support against an enemy with greater focus and resilience.”
From Peace Promises to Escalation: How Trump Fell Into His Own Trap
Trump has repeatedly criticised his predecessors for costly campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. He promised to end “endless wars” and not to become entangled in new ones. Now, however, analysts believe he may be repeating the same mistake.
The New York Times notes that “President Trump may have fallen into the same trap as his predecessors in Iraq and Afghanistan. He ran vowing to end wars, not start them, and never to get sucked into an endless war, especially in the Middle East.”
The New York Times also reminds us that “no one starts a war expecting it to last forever. Yet US presidents have repeatedly been drawn into conflicts that seemed as if they could go on indefinitely — at least until the next president decided the costs and political pain weren’t worth it.”
Sixth Night of Strikes: Targets Expand, Casualties Mount
The United States has carried out a sixth consecutive night of airstrikes on Iranian targets. According to Reuters, US forces struck targets on Qeshm Island and near Bandar Abbas, which hosts Iran’s largest port, as well as key naval and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) facilities.
US Central Command (CENTCOM) said the strikes were carried out using “fighter aircraft, drones, and naval vessels” and hit “dozens of Iranian military targets, including coastal surveillance systems, air defence sites, military logistics infrastructure, and naval assets.”
However, the scope of strikes is widening. According to ABC News, the US has begun striking bridges in southern Iran. Iranian state media reported that strikes on bridges in the port city of Bandar Khamir killed seven people.
The BBC reports that strikes were carried out “near Qeshm Island, as well as in Bandar Abbas and Bushehr — the site of a nuclear power plant.” Iran said US strikes also hit Iran shahr airport and the railway station in Bandar Khamir.
Iran’s Response: Strikes on US Allies and Threats to the Region
Tehran is responding to US attacks with a series of missile and drone strikes on US facilities and those of its allies in the region. According to Reuters, Iran struck US targets in Bahrain and Kuwait on Friday, July 17.
Iranian officials said the strikes on Bahrain and Kuwait were in response to “US strikes on civilian infrastructure inside Iran.” Kuwait, for its part, reported intercepting 32 hostile drones with no civilian casualties.
A particularly alarming signal came from Qatar. The country’s Interior Ministry reported that a child was wounded by shrapnel during Iranian attacks on Doha. Qatar is a key mediator in US‑Iran negotiations.
Iranian military commander Brigadier General Ebrahim Zolfaghari said the Strait of Hormuz is Iran’s “unbreakable red line.” He also threatened to strike “all infrastructure in the region” if the US continues its attacks.
Strategic Deadlock: Why a “Forever War” Is Inevitable?
Analysts warn that the conflict in the Strait of Hormuz risks escalating into a prolonged strategic standoff. As Gulf News notes, “the greatest risk lies in an open confrontation over the Strait of Hormuz, where Washington intends to keep one of the world’s most vital shipping lanes open, while Tehran insists it is an ‘unbreakable red line.'”
Unlike Iraq or Afghanistan, Iran is a sovereign state with significant economic influence. As The New York Times emphasises, “Iran possesses a form of leverage that military superiority cannot easily neutralise.” By threatening commercial shipping, Tehran can influence global energy markets without directly engaging US forces.
Newsweek notes that a protracted conflict benefits the IRGC: “It keeps Iran in a state of constant mobilisation, justifies social repression, sidelines civilian institutions, and allows the IRGC to present itself as the country’s indispensable defender. It also preserves Iran’s most effective lever of influence: the ability to disrupt shipping in Hormuz, threaten hydrocarbon flows, and damage the global economy.”
Prospects: Diplomacy or Endless War?
Despite the escalation, the White House continues to express readiness for diplomacy. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said: “The president is always open to diplomacy.” However, the memorandum of understanding signed in June has effectively collapsed.
The Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil passes in peacetime, remains closed. Shipping has virtually stopped. As the BBC notes, “the renewed hostilities further undermine the preliminary ceasefire agreement.”
As CNN wryly observes, Trump, “who once sought a Nobel Peace Prize for ending wars, is now using military force as a casual lever, a background effect to pressure Iran into diplomacy.” However, the normalisation of violence, in the view of the outlet, “should itself be a red line.”
The question of whether Trump can avoid a “forever war” or will repeat the fate of his predecessors remains open.
