Where Trump went wrong The Statesman 21 Apr 2026
Article Read Time
Where Trump went wrong The Statesman 21 Apr 2026
The ceasefire in Iran is likely to end shortly, resulting in either renewed attacks or a peace deal, details of which could emerge soon. Trump’s major blunder was assuming tactical superiority would enable strategic victory. He expected Iran to capitulate after the removal of its hierarchy, especially since Netanyahu promised regime change, based on MOSSAD’s control over the Iranian opposition and presence of agents within. Days stretched into weeks and Iran held its ground. It opened new frontiers, hitting back, forcing Trump into a corner.
Weeks later, no capitulation, rising losses, low availability of missiles, Trump started becoming delusional. He threatened eradicating an ‘entire civilization,’ demanding NATO join the conflict and switched from claiming ‘strategic’ victory to announcing ‘tactical’ gains, implying destruction of Iran’s military assets. Yet, Iran held its ground, aware that they only have to survive to win, while the US will lose if they don’t secure an unconditional surrender.
For the US to win, boots on the ground or destruction of civilian infrastructure and residential areas as Israel had done in Gaza is the only option. Netanyahu already faces an ICC warrant for Israel’s actions in Gaza, defended on the logic that these were Hamas’s bases. It is repeating the same in Lebanon. It is unlikely Trump can copy this model. The US armed forces will most likely refuse and this could mean an insult to Trump’s leadership.
What Trump failed to realize was that nations where nationalism rides high have the resilience to absorb strikes and retaliate with asymmetric force. Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan forced the US to withdraw in defeat, despite powerful and damaging aerial strikes but failure at the ground level. Conventional carpet bombing and a naval blockade failed to bring about a Japanese surrender at the end of the second world war. It only did so after nuclear strikes. Nuclear strikes are currently not on the cards in Iran. A major lesson from earlier conflicts that military superiority, largely aerial, does not guarantee victory was missed by Trump and his cronies.
At the end of the second week of the conflict, Trump tweeted, ‘There will be no deal with Iran except UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER! After that, and the selection of a GREAT & ACCEPTABLE Leader(s), we, and many of our wonderful and very brave allies and partners, will work tirelessly to bring Iran back from the brink of destruction, making it economically bigger, better, and stronger than ever before. IRAN WILL HAVE A GREAT FUTURE. MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN.’ On the contrary, it is Trump who is now pushing Pakistan to mediate and draw Tehran into talks.
The US has since stopped referring to unconditional surrender and instead announces economic actions and ceasefire talks. There was no doubt from the start that US possesses air power to inflict tactical losses on Iran, especially since Israel had destroyed most of their air defence systems in Jun last year. Iran absorbed these losses and hit back, forcing the US to recalibrate its objectives.
Trump chose Pakistan as the mediator, mainly because the ‘Interests Section’ of Iran operates under the Pak embassy in Washington. The first round of US-Iran talks failed largely because Pakistan never correctly shared each nation’s demand with the other. Had it done so, talks could have been delayed till there was some common ground for agreement. US intelligence has also red-flagged Asim Munir as a wrong choice for his close links with Iran’s IRGC and Pakistan for unreliability in mediation based on the Afghan experience.
Trump has hurt US interests by regularly tweeting his terms of dialogue with Iran. This surrenders the initiative to Tehran, which rejects them on social media, embarrassing Trump. Ideally, conditions should have been kept under wraps until some basic commonality was reached. Trump claiming that US will shift all enriched Uranium to its soil, will never be acceptable to Iran. Moving it to Russia may be a better option. If Trump now agrees on Russia, it will be termed defeat by his detractors. Trump refuses to accept that his midnight tweets cause more damage than good.
Tehran had insisted that ceasefire in Lebanon is a primary condition for commencement of talks. Without consulting Netanyahu, Trump accepted and went as far as tweeting, ‘Israel will not be bombing Lebanon any longer. They are PROHIBITED from doing so by the U.S.A. Enough is enough.’ Israel was shocked, but had no choice. The reason, Trump realized that victory in Iran is no longer possible and the best option is accepting talks, opening doors to a honourable exit.
Trump assumed that imposing a blockade would add to pressure on Iran and speed up dialogue. By insisting on opening of the Hormuz Straits, it was Trump who told Tehran that this was their master card. Iran has shut Hormuz, until the blockade is lifted. The blockade may have been a tactical victory for the US but ended up as a strategic defeat. Trump has limited options. If he lifts the blockade, he would hand victory to Iran, if he does not do so, then the only option is re-starting hostilities. His only face-saving is lifting the blockade with simultaneous opening of Hormuz, alongside commencement of talks.
The US is in dire straits. It is running out of missiles, has lost around 20 aircraft and around two dozen UAVs while its critical radars and bases in the Middle East are destroyed. Its forces are expeditionary deployed away from the war zone, making supporting ground operations difficult. His naval troops are exhausted and facing scarcity of rations. Deploying closer to the Middle East brings them within missile range of Iran. European allies are also being unhelpful.
Iran has emerged as a regional powerhouse as their strategy of selective disruption and asymmetric warfare has proven successful against the world’s most powerful nation. Trump by his tweets announcing demands even before they are accepted, changing his base line from strategic victory to a tactical one, has weakened US military reputation. The US end state was faulty from the start.
Trump should read Clausewitz, who mentioned, ‘No one starts a war–or rather, no one in his senses ought to do so–without first being clear in his mind what he intends to achieve by that war and how he intends to conduct it.’ Trump does not fit into one with senses.
About the Author
Maj Gen Harsha Kakkar
Retired Major General Indian Army