5 min readMar 28, 2026 03:14 PM IST First published on: Mar 28, 2026 at 03:14 PM ISTNotwithstanding US President Donald Trump’s reported claim that he wished to avoid a prolonged conflict in Iran and is now considering “winding down the war,” the reality on the ground tells a starkly different story. Nearly a month after Israel and the United States — the world’s most formidable military powers — launched massive airstrikes against Iran aimed at dismantling Tehran’s nuclear and ballistic missile programmes and even fomenting regime change, there remains little sign of an early end to the war. It is rapidly sliding into a protracted crisis, one that continues to send shockwaves through the global economy. What may be underlined, however, is that while Iran appears to be fighting a battle for survival, the US increasingly seems to be searching for an honourable exit from this deepening strategic quagmire.The current phase of the conflict underscores a recurring lesson of modern warfare — one long cautioned by Carl von Clausewitz — that wars, once begun, acquire a momentum of their own, making them far easier to start than to end. It also lays bare an enduring fallacy embedded in strategic thinking in Washington and Tel Aviv: That overwhelming military force, backed by technological and intelligence superiority, can deliver swift and decisive political outcomes. Early “decapitation” strikes targeting Iran’s top leadership — including supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and key figures such as Ali Larijani — may have briefly reinforced this belief, yet they have produced neither the regime’s collapse nor its surrender. Instead, they have rallied the Iranian people more firmly than ever behind the regime, muting dissent and transforming internal discontent into a collective stand against external aggression.AdvertisementMilitary intervention may disrupt, degrade, or even temporarily disable a state’s capabilities, but it rarely secures the deeper objectives of political submission or regime transformation without prolonged engagement and unforeseen consequences. From Iraq to Libya, the US military interventions have largely resulted in prolonged instability, power vacuums, internal strife, and devastating humanitarian crises — leaving these societies fractured and fragile rather than fostering durable democracy or lasting peace.Trump’s Iran war is fast becoming a costly misadventure — for Iran and the United States alike. In the first six days alone, the US burned through an estimated $11–13 billion — at a rate of up to $2 billion per day — with total costs projected to reach $60 billion within a month. This figure excludes pre-war military build-up expenses. As the administration seeks an additional $200 billion from Congress, Americans have already started feeling the pinch: Oil prices have soared from $73 per barrel pre-war to $120, severely impacting the economy and squeezing consumers across the board. A recent Gallup poll shows that a third of Americans are skipping meals and forgoing other needs to afford healthcare. The message is hard to miss: An open-ended war abroad is deepening insecurity and hardship at home.For Iran, the costs are even more devastating. Sustained US–Israel airstrikes have severely damaged critical energy infrastructure, compounding the strain on an economy already weakened by sanctions and pushing it toward deeper contraction as manufacturing and trade falter. The human toll is rising sharply: Over 1,500 civilians have been killed — including scores of children in a single strike on a girls’ elementary school in Minab — with thousands more injured. More than 3.2 million people are estimated to have been displaced, while hundreds of schools, health facilities, and historic landmarks lie damaged, underscoring the widening humanitarian catastrophe. While Tehran has demonstrated a remarkable capacity to absorb the shocks of war and sustain retaliation — frustrating expectations of a quick collapse or capitulation — its command structure has been severely weakened. Moreover, its once vast and diverse missile and drone arsenal in the region has been “massively degraded,” if not exhausted, sharply limiting its ability to respond swiftly and effectively.AdvertisementMore troubling still are the mounting challenges confronting America’s regional allies — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Oman — whose vulnerabilities are proving far more acute than ever anticipated. Repeated Iranian missile strikes are unsettling their economies, endangering critical infrastructure, and placing civilian safety at risk. For decades, these states have relied heavily on the American security umbrella, investing significantly in US defence systems, hosting its military bases, and, in some cases, like Oman, serving as quiet intermediaries between the US and Iran, till the present crisis. Yet today, they find themselves increasingly exposed. This may deepen their sense of strategic unease, potentially forcing a profound strategic realignment, one that could fundamentally alter the region’s security, economic, and geopolitical landscape.you may likeEqually disquieting for the US is the response of its traditional European allies. Despite longstanding ties and institutional frameworks such as NATO, they outright rejected Trump’s call for a naval coalition to reopen the Strait of Hormuz following Iranian disruption —emphasising strategic autonomy and prioritising diplomatic solutions over escalation. Their reluctance reflects not only war fatigue but also a deeper scepticism about the strategic coherence and legal justification of such intervention.The writer is dean, Faculty of International Studies, Aligarh Muslim University