Iran War: Why Trump’s Strategy Risks Repeating Past US Failures

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing to conclude its military conflict with Iran without securing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a decision that underscores the challenges of what analysts describe as a trap of “asymmetric resolve.”

President Donald Trump is scheduled to address the nation on the evening of April 1, 2026, regarding the war, indicating that U.S. Forces could withdraw within two to three weeks. The announcement comes as the crucial shipping passage remains effectively closed, driving global oil prices to nearly four-year highs.

While the White House has clarified that reopening the waterway is not a core objective of the mission, the strategic impasse reflects a dynamic observed in previous U.S. Conflicts. According to analysis regarding the war, the United States has encountered a disparity in determination between itself and the Iranian government.

Exit Strategy Amidst Closure

Over the 48 hours leading up to April 1, 2026, administration officials signaled a shift in priorities. Despite the economic impact of the Strait’s closure, President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth have downplayed the waterway’s importance to U.S. Interests.

View this post on Instagram

Speaking from the Oval Office, President Trump stated that other nations would need to manage the security of the passage independently.

If France or some other country wants to get oil or gas, they’ll go up through the strait … they’ll be able to fend for themselves. That’s not for us. That’ll be for France. That’ll be for whoever’s using the strait.

President Donald Trump

The average price of petrol in the U.S. Has reached $4 a gallon for the first time since the summer of 2022. President Trump argued that prices would fall once the war ended, asserting that Tehran would not continue to meaningfully block the waterway after hostilities ceased.

Reports indicate that Trump has told aides he is willing to end the war without a deal to reopen the Strait. This stance contrasts with earlier objectives, as the waterway facilitates the transit of approximately one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas in peacetime.

The Trap of Asymmetric Resolve

Analysts researching U.S. Military engagements suggest the situation illustrates the concept of asymmetric resolve. This occurs when a stronger power with less determination to fight engages a weaker state that has a near boundless determination to prevail.

the Iranian government views the conflict as an existential threat to its regime, providing incentives to fight on that the United States does not share. While the U.S. Does not face the same potential for regime death, Tehran has employed countermeasures to sustain the costs of war.

Data from mid-March 2026 highlights the disparity in casualties. Reports indicated upward of 5,000 Iranian military casualties and more than 1,500 Iranian civilian deaths. In contrast, 13 U.S. Service members had died in the conflict.

Despite suffering disproportionate losses, Tehran has not backed down. On March 10, 2026, the IRGC stated, “We will determine when the war ends.”

International and Domestic Reactions

The closure of the Strait has become a central anxiety for Washington’s allies. An Iranian official stated on April 1, 2026, that the Strait would open, but not to the United States. Meanwhile, reports suggest the United Arab Emirates is willing to join the fight to force the passage open.

Domestically, public support for the war has declined. A Marist poll from March 6, 2026, found that 55% of Americans viewed Iran as a minor threat or no threat at all. Other polling consistently finds around 60% of Americans in opposition to the conflict.

This lack of public support presents a challenge for the administration, as fading resolve in democracies can influence leadership stability. In contrast, while the Iranian government faced widespread protests prior to the war, a potential “rally around the flag” effect has made public opinion less salient in Tehran.

Historical Parallels

The dynamics of the Iran war draw comparisons to previous U.S. Engagements. In the Vietnam War, the U.S. Withdrew after eight years despite inflicting significantly higher casualties on North Vietnamese forces. Similarly, in Afghanistan, the U.S. Unseated the Taliban in 2001 but ultimately withdrew after 20 years, allowing the Taliban to return to power.

Experts note that great powers often fall into this trap when facing smaller military powers with greater resolve. The Soviet Union suffered a defeat in Afghanistan during the 1980s and France faced similar outcomes in Vietnam and Algeria after World War II.

Future Trajectories

History suggests two potential trajectories for the stronger power in such conflicts: escalation or winding down the conflict. While there are signs that President Trump wants to end the war, additional U.S. Troops are deploying to the Gulf, and B-52 bombers have been flying over Iran.

President Trump has previously opted to wind down conflicts, signing a deal with the Taliban in 2020 and declaring victory in an air war in Yemen last year. To end the war with Iran, the administration may need to concede on issues such as unfettered access through Hormuz or sanctions relief.

As the administration prepares for the President’s address on April 1, 2026, the focus remains on whether the U.S. Will accept a “no deal” exit strategy or attempt to escalate forces to achieve objectives that have thus far remained out of reach.