The well-known theorist Carl von Clausewitz wrote that war is a sphere dominated by chaos and danger, where even the simplest decision can appear extremely complicated. That is why, when wars begin—although ideally they should never be started—there are usually at least several plans for how the situation might unfold. The worst-case scenario occurs when everything goes off-plan, and the only option left is “just keep fighting.” This is exactly what happened in Ukraine, and it seems to be happening now in Iran.
US President Donald Trump, the main instigator of this war, has found himself in a difficult situation. The regime of the Ayatollah in Tehran has proven far more resilient than expected. Even after the elimination of the top leadership, the institutions of the Islamic Revolution have held firm. A new leader has already been appointed—the son of the deceased Ayatollah Khamenei—and resistance continues. Iranians have not ceased bombing across the Middle East and declare that they are willing to fight “even for ten years.”
Amid this, the American leader has made highly contradictory statements. Initially, he claimed that the operation against Tehran and its regime would last “a few days”—literally like “Kyiv in three days.” Later, the timeline shifted to 4–5 weeks. Within a day or two, media reports began to suggest that the war could drag on for six months or more.
Yesterday, the US president said in an interview that the war is “almost over” and that Iran is on the verge of surrender. These words were later contradicted by both the US Secretary of Defense and Iranian representatives. By the following morning, Trump himself said something entirely different: perhaps this is not “almost the end,” but “just the beginning.”
To summarize all these mutually contradictory statements in one phrase: “it is clear that nothing is clear.” Finding logic in this “fog of war” is extremely difficult. But one thing is evident: Washington does not seem to have a clear plan of action. This is why Trump makes statements that literally contradict each other within hours.
So how close is the end of the war in the Middle East? Are we talking about days, at most weeks, or many months? Does the US have any plan? UA.News posed these questions to experts.
The crisis in Iran is a “pre-war” situation: military expert Oleg Starikov
The political goal of Trump’s war is regime change—or at least a change of the regime leader if the old leader is uncompromising. The strategy is implemented as follows: decapitation, or “head-removal,” in order to provoke a political crisis and trigger a regime change. Why this strategy? To achieve regime change without a ground invasion, which would be disadvantageous for both the US and Israel.
They are also implementing a strategy of shock and suppression: strikes on air defense systems, infrastructure facilities, and the navy, leaving Iran completely defeated in the air and at sea. Now, to conquer the country, a ground operation would be necessary. However, the likelihood of this is very low.
It is important to understand that in military affairs, everything is always planned and modeled. Trump’s back-and-forth—from “almost finished” to “not yet”—is known as the “madman strategy,” previously used by President Nixon to end the Vietnam War. This is also part of the plan.
The ultimate goal, however, remains unchanged: regime change. So far, this has not been achieved. Iran has lost the war in conventional terms, but the regime has consolidated. This is a regime completely different from Western ones; it has a completely different structure. A new Rahbar has been appointed, and the regime continues to function.
And now the most frightening part—Israel has already realized this. A “special military operation” can be conducted for 60 days, after which Congress will demand either an end or explanations. Therefore, Starikov believes that the Americans will exit the war in the near future. They did not anticipate that it could lead to the collapse of the region’s entire economic, financial, and energy systems.
Intelligence also indicates that Iran may activate terrorist cells to conduct operations around the world, because martyrdom is central to Iranian religious belief—they will continue resistance in this way. Why did Khamenei not hide deep underground in a bunker, why was he killed? Because he now became a martyr. This is their faith.
Overall, this crisis is a “pre-war” situation. Local conflicts escalate to regional ones, which then affect the entire world and could potentially lead to a Third World War, to an apocalypse. Therefore, Starikov believes that this war will end soon. This should happen in the coming weeks.
Trump could start a war with Iran, but cannot finish it alone: director of the Ukrainian Institute of Politics Ruslan Bortnik
For Trump, the war may be over—or he may wish it to end—but it is not over for Iran. Iran refuses to end it, as it has stated directly. As long as Iran blocks the Strait of Hormuz and continues striking US military bases and allied bases in the region, the war will not end.
Trump could start a war, but he cannot end it unilaterally. Therefore, I would not say that the war is nearing its end in light of Iran’s statements. It seems that Trump is trying to create the appearance of control over the situation and to calm the markets, which have already started reacting strongly. We saw oil prices spike sharply; we see rising fuel prices.
Iran continues to fight. It will also try to make the war look not merely like a stalemate, but as a tactical or even strategic victory for Iran. Most likely, we are still far from the end of this confrontation.
Yes, at some point, the sides may say “enough” and declare themselves victorious. But military resources allow them to fight for at least several more weeks. Expecting the war to end in a few weeks is quite difficult.
Khamenei’s assassination solved nothing: political analyst Andriy Zolotaryov
Trump, as someone who likes simple solutions to complex problems, has found himself in a very difficult situation in Iran. In fact, this is a zugzwang. A military option to achieve victory over Iran is quite illusory, even though it is clear that “on points” in this war the US has the advantage.
The systemic mistake was that power in Iran is network-centered, so the physical elimination of Ali Khamenei solved nothing. His son succeeded him, and no administrative chaos has been observed. That is why the expectation that the regime would collapse after Khamenei’s death has failed.
The current situation is such that no result except the overthrow of power in Iran will be considered a Trump “defeat.” No matter what he says about victory—he could, of course, end the war as the person who started it in a single day—but the destructive consequences would affect his domestic politics in the US. For most voters—both Democrats and Republicans—this would appear as a political rout, and Trump would become a “lame duck” or lose on points.
Thus, the consequences of this war will reverberate in the world for a long time: in the economy and in domestic politics in the US, Europe, and China.
The best option for Trump: gradual suppression of the Iranian regime: political analyst Volodymyr Fesenko
Iran is a trap for Trump that he set for himself. His claim that the war is “almost over” is simply wishful thinking.
At the same time, the US president clearly wants to exit the war. This is why he recently spoke with Putin, and why he is trying to stabilize oil prices. But he clearly does not have a concrete plan—at least not a fast one. That is Trump’s problem.
Fesenko believes that Trump may try, possibly through Putin, to negotiate with the Iranians in order to de facto end the war after some time and declare himself the winner. But the question is: will the Iranians agree? And if they continue their strikes? That would invalidate any of Trump’s statements. This is the trap he is in.
We must also not forget that Iran does not have unlimited resources. The country is in a deep economic crisis, and has been for a long time. But as long as it has missiles and drones, the aerial phase of the war will continue.
Possibly, the US strategy is to tighten the military-economic noose around Iran gradually, pressing it further until it cannot strike back. But Iran will still be able to defend itself, and the US is not ready for a ground operation. Therefore, for Trump, the best course of action is precisely the gradual suppression of Iranian resistance.
