The New York Times: The Iran war revealed the limits of American military power policy

American writer W.J. Heneghan criticized the United States’ performance in its war against Iran and said, “That operation revealed the limits of American military power and led to a strategic defeat, despite the enormous military and technological superiority that Washington demonstrated on the battlefield.”

In an article in the New York Times, the writer specializing in national security and foreign policy affairs says, “US President Donald Trump announced a few days after the start of the war that the United States was on the verge of achieving a decisive victory, but the results that appeared after three months were far from the declared goals.”

He points out that the war left 13 Americans and thousands of Iranians dead, in addition to spending at least $29 billion in public money, without Washington being able to topple the Iranian regime, eliminate its nuclear program, or neutralize its missile and drone capabilities.

The writer attributes this failure to the fact that Trump fought a war against an opponent who did not need to achieve a complete military victory, but rather steadfastness was sufficient for him. He also chose an alliance with Israel, which had different goals based on preserving its regional superiority rather than seeking to end the conflict.

Fragility indicators

He believes that Washington ended up accepting a fragile, conditional truce instead of the “unconditional surrender” that Trump demanded, which revealed fundamental weaknesses in the American military industrial base, and raised growing concerns about the United States’ readiness to confront greater adversaries in the future.

Although the US Navy succeeded in disrupting a large portion of Iranian oil trade, destroyed thousands of military and industrial targets, and caused extensive damage to the Iranian air force and navy, Tehran demonstrated a great ability to withstand.

The writer points out that US intelligence estimates indicated that Iran retained about 70% of its missile stock until last May, and that the political system continued to function despite the killing of Iranian leader Ali Khamenei during the first days of the war, as his son Mojtaba Khamenei was quickly appointed as his successor.

He adds that the regional allies of the United States are increasingly raising questions about the feasibility of hosting American forces after many American bases, embassies and facilities were subjected to Iranian retaliatory attacks, which has increased fears that the presence of American forces will become a source of threat to the security of those countries.

The war also highlighted another problem related to over-reliance on advanced and expensive weapons that take a long time to reproduce, as US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth acknowledged that replacing spent stocks may take months or even years.

Fragility indicators

Writer Hennigan warns that China and Russia will read these indicators as evidence of the fragility of American military industrial capacity, which may encourage Beijing in particular to test the limits of American deterrence in the future.

He points out that the framework agreement signed between Washington and Tehran gave the two parties a period of sixty days to reach a final settlement, but thorny issues still remain, most notably the fate of about 440 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium, in addition to another ten tons of enriched nuclear material, the Iranian missile program, and Tehran’s support for its regional allies.

The writer quotes Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, as saying that the success of the negotiations may change the nature of US-Iranian relations and redraw the geopolitical map of the region, but he warns that being satisfied with a temporary memorandum of understanding without a sustainable agreement will constitute “a complete definition of a strategic mistake.”

Hennigan concludes that the United States is now facing a new reality represented by thousands of victims, rising global energy prices, and mounting concerns about the future of regional stability, at a time when both Washington and Tehran are declaring their victory, while the world awaits whether the fragile peace will hold or whether a new round of escalation looms on the horizon.