Last summer, when the US bombed Iran’s Fordo facility, it was premised on single goal: prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.
But to do that would require not just crippling Fordo and similar installations, but also retrieving the HEU that lays within. Trump did not do the latter, and yet declared victory nonetheless.
This pattern has repeated throughout the latest incarnation of the war: Declare an objective, go halfway to meeting it, and then stop and declare this new midway point the threshold of success. The result has been inefficacious, to put it mildly.
The consequence is that, during the kinetic stages of this conflict, the US has found itself engaged in a non-traditional “interception war”: trading million-dollar Patriot missiles and other costly interceptors for garage-built drones. We have seen, especially most recently at the US base in Jordan, the devastating effect these low-cost Iranian munitions can have.
And therein lies the problem with Trump’s “half-commitment” approach. It does not portray caution or the shrewd use of diplomacy, but begets a scenario that becomes the most expensive option available, both in terms of lives and money. In other words, the US is now paying for both the war and the resulting failure of not having achieved its stated goals.