The United States continues to engage in a cycle of military strikes, ceasefires, negotiations, and renewed attacks with Iran, a pattern that benefits the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), according to an opinion contributor for The Hill.

This recurring cycle allows Tehran to rearm and replenish its missile stockpiles, while Washington remains caught in escalation and de-escalation phases without a clear definition of what victory entails. The Trump administration, the article notes, has not adequately explained to the American public how confronting Iran advances national security or why the costs of such confrontations are justified.

The piece also points out that Iran will likely continue targeting U.S. bases, Gulf partners, and international shipping, operating under the belief that American political resolve will falter before that of the Islamic Republic.

Comparisons are drawn to past conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, with the author emphasizing that unlike Afghanistan in the 1980s, 80 to 90 percent of Iranians seeking regime change are among the most pro-American Muslim populations in the Middle East. During the Cold War, American support for Afghan resistance contributed to the Soviet Union's withdrawal, suggesting a different dynamic at play in Iran.

The article questions the rationale behind fighting another war against Iran if regime change is not the goal, underscoring the need for a coherent long-term strategy.

Sources