As President Trump weighs his next moves to end the military campaign—or, as some call it, the “excursion”—into Iran, predicting his decisions has become a guessing game. But far less attention has been paid to how Tehran's leadership is calculating its own path forward.
Both sides have adhered to a shaky truce, punctuated by attacks, counterattacks, and threats to walk away from negotiations. The White House has echoed Henry Kissinger's premature declaration that peace in Vietnam was “at hand,” making similar overstatements about wrapping up the joint U.S.-Israeli operation against Iran. Yet all wars end. The real question is how and when.
Iran's Strategic Assessment
Imagine what Iran's leaders are thinking. First, despite America's overwhelming military superiority, the conflict has essentially reached a stalemate. Second, Iran has drained many of America's most expensive missiles by repelling drone strikes, while keeping an estimated 70 percent of its own missile arsenal in reserve—and it is steadily replenishing both drones and missiles.
Third, Tehran has wielded the Strait of Hormuz as a powerful weapon, blocking ships carrying not only oil and liquefied natural gas but also helium—critical for chip manufacturing—and nitrates used in fertilizer. This has strained global economies, driving up fuel and fertilizer prices that hit average Americans hardest. Public dissatisfaction has fueled a rapid decline in support for the war and a drop in Trump's approval ratings.
Reading the Political Tea Leaves in Washington
Fourth, Iran closely monitors U.S. media. It sees Trump losing ground on multiple fronts at home. Notably, the House passed a bill requiring the president to seek congressional authorization to continue the war. Whether the Senate concurs or Trump vetoes, Tehran views this as a sign of waning American appetite for the conflict. Trump's withdrawal of a $1.8 billion reparations bill—reportedly aimed at those targeted by the government, including participants in the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot—further signals weakness, according to Iranian strategists.
Fifth, Iran believes it can exploit divisions between Gulf states and the United States. Its ultimate lever: the ability to destroy desalination plants on which Gulf nations depend entirely for fresh water—a catastrophic threat that could reshape regional alliances. For more on how Iran is using ceasefires to drive wedges between Trump and key allies, see Tehran's Lebanon truce tactics.
The Perception of Victory
Sixth, Iran now believes it is winning and will outlast the U.S., concluding that Washington will eventually buckle. But many Americans struggle to understand how Iran can endure thousands of attacks and Trump's threats to turn the country “back to the Stone Ages.” This failure to grasp an adversary's thinking has led to disaster before—in Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq after 2003.
I have previously argued that Trump would likely try to spin his way out of this mess by declaring victory, regardless of the final settlement. That still seems the most sensible course. The longer this conflict drags on, the stronger Iran's position may become.
Iran's leadership also recognizes that as primary season ends, Republican lawmakers who no longer face challengers may start representing their constituents' anti-war sentiments rather than bowing to a president who can no longer threaten their reelection. This dynamic is playing out as redistricting chaos reshapes congressional races in several states.
Risks and Uncertainties
All this is speculation. Iran's leaders could also focus on their devastated economy and infrastructure, wrecked by U.S. and Israeli strikes. A cornered Trump might follow through on his promise to destroy the country's bridges and infrastructure—that is not impossible.
Yet the administration initially believed that killing the old leadership would force surrender or regime change, ignoring war-game results showing Iran could block the Strait and hit its neighbors. It may be repeating those deadly errors.
In time, we will find out how this ends.
Harlan Ullman is senior adviser at the Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company, and principal author of the shock-and-awe doctrine. His next book, “Who Thinks Best Wins: How Decisive Strategic Thinking Will Prevent Global Chaos,” co-written with former UK defense chief Lord David Richards, is due out this fall.
