The Art of the Steal

Trump now says he never intended regime change in Iran. But on the day he launched the war, he told the Iranian people they would soon have their country back. That reversal is the clearest illustration of the consequences of a strategic blunder that is ending with a raw deal that strengthens the mafia running Iran and exposes the limits of American power. On NewsNation, I called it “the Art of the Steal,” as practiced by the wily and wicked operatives in Tehran.

This happened despite the astounding decapitation of Iran’s leadership early on and the subsequent brutalization of Iran’s security apparatus. But whereas the US and Israel planned effectively for the opening phase, there was no preparation for the economic and geopolitical consequences that followed, once Iran shifted the battlefield into asymmetric disruption and global economic coercion. At that point, it was all about Trump being terrified of the looming US midterm elections — as a Democratic takeover of Congress would trash what’s left of his agenda.

Trump will claim victory, but AQL’s scorecard reveals wreckage and failure.

Here are our grades, by issue:

THE STRAIT OF HORMUZ

The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz is presented as a central achievement of the agreement. Yet the strait had always been open before, while the war allowed Iran to prove it can generate immediate global economic panic through relatively cheap means: drones and rockets became sufficient to terrify energy markets and pressure global governments into demanding de-escalation. Iran appears to have promised almost nothing beyond the reopening, and seems to even want a role in permissioning passage. The framework reportedly allows for 60 days of negotiations on such details.

Expect more blackmail. As late as Sunday Ali Akbar Velayati, adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, was warning of linkage between Hormuz – and also Red Sea access which can be impeded by Iran’s proxy the Yemini Houthis – and Israel’s actions in Lebanon: “If the fire of mischief in Lebanon is not extinguished, the two powerful geographic arms – Hormuz and Bab al-Mandab – will squeeze your economic lifelines to the point of strategic suffocation.”

Before the war, the danger of Iran economically blackmailing the world existed largely in theory. After the war, it became a demonstrated reality.

GRADE: D

THE “NUCLEAR FILE”

The war was justified heavily through claims regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions, yet the emerging agreement appears nowhere close to dismantling Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Iran has not explicitly agreed to surrender all highly enriched uranium or destroy its facilities. Instead, the likely framework resembles another version of managed containment and monitoring.

Iran will promise not to pursue nukes – and that outcome is ironic because Trump and his allies spent years ridiculing President Obama’s 2015 JCPOA and insisting that no rational person should trust Iranian commitments (even though Israeli and Western intelligence maintained that Iran largely complied). If the final result of this war is essentially another modified version of containment, then it achieved little that could not likely have been obtained diplomatically before the first missile was fired.

GRADE: C

BALLISTIC MISSILES AND GULF SECURITY

The war transformed perceptions of Iran’s missile capabilities and the vulnerability of the Gulf monarchies – and the agreement and upcoming talks do not appear to even address the issue.

States such as the UAE, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia built their economic models around stability, finance, logistics, tourism, and enormous expatriate populations. Their prosperity depends on drawing expats to their shiny sandlot, which in turn depends on insulation from regional chaos.

Iran demonstrated that even limited bombardment could threaten that entire system. Early in the war, several Gulf governments quietly favored sustained pressure on Iran and hoped prolonged conflict might destabilize the regime permanently. Once Iranian retaliation began affecting regional calculations, the mood shifted dramatically. Gulf governments moved from hawkish enthusiasm to desperation for de-escalation. Reports that the UAE and others may have offered financial inducements to Iran in exchange for restraint reveal the scale of the panic. Iran emerged from military punishment having strengthened its deterrent position in the Gulf – with the US looking like it cannot protect its allies.

GRADE: F

THE PROXY MILITIAS

Perhaps the most outrageous outcome concerns Iran’s proxy network. Hezbollah, while weakened by Israel, remains dominant in Lebanon – with Iran still falsely presenting itself as the country’s protector. Hamas and Islamic Jihad continue poisoning any prospect of Israeli-Palestinian coexistence through terrorism and extremism. The Houthis continue disrupting maritime trade and devastating Egyptian revenues connected to the Suez Canal and Red Sea commerce. Iraqi militias tied to Tehran remain intact.

The entire architecture of Iranian regional destabilization survived the war almost entirely intact. Indeed, the emerging framework may strengthen Iran’s leverage by linking Israeli military freedom of action in Lebanon to broader regional arrangements connected to Hormuz and Gulf stability. Iran appears to have maneuvered itself into a position where Hezbollah gains additional protection through the world’s fear of economic disruption.

GRADE: F

SANCTIONS RELIEF AND REGIME SURVIVAL

Instead of handing Iran back to its people, the US is handing their oppressors tens of billions of dollars – and demanding no reforms of even a promise not massacre protests again. Iran is poised to receive enormous sanctions relief, access to frozen assets, renewed trade opportunities, and long-term financial recovery potentially worth tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars.

That money will strengthen not only the regime itself but also the machinery of repression and regional influence that sustains it. Some funds will inevitably flow toward Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, and other proxy organizations. Other funds will reinforce the Basij and broader security structures responsible for crushing dissent inside Iran.

For the Iranian opposition this is devastating. Iranians who despise the regime believed the military successes at the beginning of the war signaled a serious American (and Israeli) commitment to bringing down the dictatorship once its command structures had been shattered. Instead, the regime’s survival itself will appear like a victory and might temper any near-term chance of renewed protest. It’s devastating for the democratic Iranian opposition, and for the Iranian people.

GRADE: F

THE WESTERN ALLIANCE

The war exposed the profound deterioration of the Western alliance. The tensions between Trump and America’s allies — driven by his tariff aggression, public insults, threats, and persistent questioning of NATO’s value — left the alliance unable to present a coherent front during a major international crisis. European governments, already distrustful of US leadership, were reluctant to align with Trump and focused on protecting their own economic interests.

Any confrontation with Iran carried an obvious risk that Tehran would disrupt shipping through one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints, directly affecting European economies and energy security — yet the US made no effort at a common strategy; by April the Europeans were talking about an independent path to securing the Gulf. The result was a fractured Western coalition that projected uncertainty and disunity to Tehran, weakened deterrence, and reduced diplomatic leverage at precisely the moment collective resolve was most needed.

GRADE: F

THE ISRAEL-AMERICA ALLIANCE

The consequences for Israeli-American relations are equally alarming. Netanyahu spent years tying Israel almost entirely to the American right and especially to Donald Trump personally while relations with much of Europe deteriorated sharply and support among Democrats collapsed. That left Israel dangerously dependent on one political figure. Now even that relationship appears unstable. Iran maneuvered the conflict into a framework where Israel’s defensive actions in Lebanon threatened negotiations that Trump desperately wanted in order to stabilize oil markets and calm the global economy. After the latest Israeli strike in Beirut reportedly endangered the talks, Trump exploded at Netanyahu. According to Axios, Trump reacted furiously: “Why did Bibi have to do a fucking attack? I was so pissed off. I let him know. He has no fucking judgement.”

American presidents historically pressured Israel privately, but avoided publicly framing Israel as subordinate in ways that projected weakness internationally. Trump increasingly speaks as though Israeli military action operates under his personal authorization and timetable. That creates a dangerous perception that Israel functions less as an autonomous regional power and more as a dependent client constrained by Washington’s political calculations.

GRADE: F

Even if you accept that any deal was needed to bring the misadventure to an end, the grade for the war itself averages out to an F+. I’m not sure that grade exists, but I’m sticking with it.

This war became one of the great strategic blunders of the modern era because the US entered it without a coherent plan for what would follow the opening military successes. With Israel, it planned brilliantly for decapitation strikes and operational dominance — but failed catastrophically to prepare for the predictable economic dimension, especially the totally predictable possibility that Iran would exploit the Strait of Hormuz to impose global pain. Not only was the need to absorb some months of such pain not convincingly communicated to America’s allies – Trump spent his first year in office offending them with idiocies like his threats to invade Greenland, a territory of NATO ally Denmark.

Iran transformed military defeat into a form of victory by shifting the conflict into an economic confrontation where the world lacked the tolerance for sustained disruption while the Iranian regime remained fully prepared to absorb suffering indefinitely, including suffering imposed on its own people.

Will this sad spectacle save the Republicans in the midterms, just because US voters were not keen on the war? I’m not so sure. Other than (to a limited degree) on immigration and the War on Wokeness, it is hard to find Trump policies that enjoys public support, and his tariff insanity and outrageously blatant corruption have brought on way too much outright derision. Logically, payback is coming.

Either way, the Iran war indisputably ends in a major strategic setback for the democratic world — snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Such are the wages of foolishness and hubris.

dan