After the 12-day war of June 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump probably thought something along these lines: “We gave those guys a good thrashing. They won’t want to repeat the experience anytime soon.”
If Iran’s rulers were what we call “rational actors,” that assessment would have been accurate. But they’re not. They’re not peace-loving. They don’t prefer compromise over conflict. They’re not concerned that the people they rule face an “affordability crisis.” They don’t worry about elections.
Iran’s rulers believe—literally, not metaphorically—that they’re on a mission from God.
Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, proclaimed himself the Rahbar‑e Mo’azzam, usually and inadequately translated as “supreme leader. The title implies that he is the Divinely ordained guardian of the Islamic Republic and steward of Islam.
After his death in 1989, he was succeeded by Ali Khamenei, who took the same title and assumed the same authority.
On Feb. 28, Khamenei was killed in an airstrike. On March 8, the Assembly of Experts, an 88-member clerical body, selected his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, as the new supreme leader, despite his reportedly being severely wounded during the same attack.
Following the U.S. and Israeli military operations last June, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, assisted by China, built up its missile and drone stockpiles, storing them in subterranean “missile cities,” while also digging under Pickaxe Mountain with the aim of installing nuclear facilities so deep underground that not even Massive Ordnance Penetrators dropped from B2s could reach them.
Did U.S. intelligence analysts underestimate the magnitude of the regime’s rearmament? If so, that would be an argument for, not against, Trump’s decision to initiate what is now being called the 40-day war.
For nearly half a century, every American president pledged that Iran’s theocrats would be prevented from acquiring the nuclear capabilities that could lead to the fulfillment of their grand ambition: “Death to America!”
Yet no serious actions were ever taken. Former President Barack Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015 allowed enrichment, left Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure intact, time-limited restrictions and legitimized a pathway to nuclear weapons.
If Trump had not struck when he did, Tehran might have acquired nukes while continuing to build up an enormous arsenal of drones and missiles. The war that past presidents concluded was unnecessary would then become a war that future presidents could not win—or could only do so at an exorbitant cost in blood and treasure.
More likely, to keep the peace, Americans would make concessions to Iran’s rulers as well as to its allies in Beijing, Moscow and Pyongyang. At that point, the sunset of American greatness would be visible on the horizon.
Last week, Trump agreed to a ceasefire and negotiations in exchange for the regime’s promise to open the Strait of Hormuz, an international waterway, subject to international law and freedom of navigation.
Talks in Islamabad over the weekend ended without an agreement. Tehran’s envoys offered no serious concessions—not on nuclear weapons and missile programs or support for terrorist proxies. They refused to recognize that the Strait of Hormuz is not an Iranian river.
They presented their own list of demands, including a “right” to enrich uranium, the lifting of sanctions and even reparations. They were betting that Trump would be eager for an “exit ramp.” They lost their bet.
Back in Tehran, will Iran’s rulers now gaze up at the skies they no longer can defend and decide that, at this point, a bad deal is better than no deal? Probably not, but if they do, we shouldn’t call whatever they propose “peace.”
Their hatred of America, Israel and the West will not have abated. They will continue to believe it is their duty to wage jihad. Their intentions may even harden, though what could be harder than “Death to America!” is not apparent to me. The U.S. military can clear their mines, but not their minds.
To those who shout: “Then what the hell was the point of this war?” I will state the obvious: This conflict was about degrading an American enemy’s capabilities, not its intentions.
Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, put numbers to the damage: 80% of Iran’s nuclear industrial base was struck, along with 80% of its missile facilities. Every Shahed drone factory is gone.
The regime’s economy, largely controlled by the IRGC, has been crippled, and Trump plans to increase the pain. The U.S. Navy has begun clearing mines from the Strait of Hormuz and preventing Iranian vessels from entering and exiting. More than 90% of Iran’s seaborne trade has been transiting that passage.
No one yet knows how badly the regime’s domestic repression apparatus has been weakened. Sooner or later, inshallah, the Iranian people may succeed in bringing down their oppressors.
If not, it’s likely to take years for the theocrats to get back to where they were prior to the 12-day war and the 40-day war. Russia and China will assist them. There’s evidence they already are.
But the United States, Israel and other nations unwilling to bow to Islamist terrorists—not yet a large coalition—can continue to blunt the regime’s claws as necessary.
There are those on both the left and the right still urging Trump to go wobbly. If they fail to convince him, history will record that he did more than any past American leader to diminish a nuclear/terrorist/jihadi national security threat that had been metastasizing for nearly half a century.
That will make many people angry, including a few that we generally think of as “rational actors.”
Originally published in “The Washington Times.”
