NEW YORK – Amid persistent contradictions in President Donald Trump’s statements regarding the trajectory of the war on Iran, The New York Times has questioned whether Trump will soon conclude what he termed an "excursion" without achieving the declared goals used to justify military intervention alongside Israel.
اضافة اعلان
The newspaper highlighted growing indicators that the fallout of this "excursion" may far exceed President Trump’s expectations. These signs include the surge in average U.S. gasoline prices to approximately $4 per gallon, the destruction of infrastructure across the Gulf, the continued resilience of the Iranian regime, and the fluctuating stances of U.S. allies toward the conflict.
The Times noted that President Trump’s rhetoric is characterized by frequent contradictions—a trait critics cite as evidence of a lack of a clear strategy, while supporters view it as "strategic ambiguity."
The New Trump Doctrine
Regarding the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, currently under Iranian blockade, Trump issued a warning to U.S. allies, stating: "Other countries that use the Strait of Hormuz will have to protect and monitor it as necessary. The United States isn't doing it!" though he added that U.S. forces would provide assistance.
Commenting on these remarks, Richard Haass, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations who served in the National Security Council and State Department during the Gulf and Iraq wars, described this as a "New Trump Doctrine for the Middle East," summarizing it as: "I created the problem, and you bear the responsibility."
Wartime Surprises
According to the report, President Trump has faced a series of surprises in the war against Iran. These include Tehran’s refusal to declare an "unconditional surrender" and a crisis gripping energy markets, which the International Energy Agency (IEA) described as the "largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market."
In response to these unforeseen developments, the U.S. administration allowed the delivery of Russian and Iranian oil shipments already at sea—a move the New York Times claims benefits both Moscow and Tehran.
The newspaper suggests that Iranians recognize that chaos in energy markets is their only remaining "superweapon." Consequently, Tehran issued a warning on Saturday that it might set fire to other facilities across the Middle East.
Another surprise for Trump has been the sudden, urgent need for allies. Initially believing the war would be short-lived, it has become clear that securing the Strait of Hormuz and other strategic transit points could take months or even years.
Furthermore, despite Israeli strikes targeting Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and top security, intelligence, and military leaders, no internal uprising has occurred—neither within the ranks of the IRGC nor among the general Iranian public.
No End in Sight
The Times remarked that wars are rarely settled within three weeks. President Trump entered the conflict after experiencing rapid successes, such as the June 2025 airstrikes on three major Iranian nuclear sites and the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
The report suggests these prior events may have led Trump to believe in the absolute power of the U.S. military and that Iran would quickly collapse. However, he appears to have been premature in his assessments.
The New York Times concluded that Iran presents a unique challenge for Trump. While he initially implied the military intervention would be a brief "trip," it has proven otherwise, with no real end to the conflict in sight.
(Agencies)
