Intimidation doesn't work on Iran - The latest American military aggression in southern Iran, which began and continues under the weak pretext of an Apache helicopter crash in the Strait of Hormuz, is a prime example of a dying power trying to restore a dissolved status quo.
US President Trump is doing it again... he is hitting Iran again... he dropped 49 Tomahawks and then said I'm stopping it... The same megalomaniac who once threatened to eliminate Iranian civilization has returned to a tired, exhausted script: demanding surrender, imposing an artificial deadline, and promising catastrophic violence if the other side refuses to succumb.
Running out of energy
His latest threat of a "hard attack" on Iran, which he presented as punishment for delaying a war-ending deal, is the piercing, panicked whistle of a political machine that is running out of energy. To the untrained eye, Trump's arrogance looks like a return to the so-called "maximum pressure" doctrine. But a more insightful reading of the strategic field reveals a completely different reality: the United States, having failed after achieving no military objectives in its recent illegal war against Iran, is now resorting to desperate psychological warfare.
Intimidation doesn't work on Iran
At the core of Trump's renewed aggressive stance lies a misguided belief that intimidation, escalation, and apocalyptic threats can force opponents into submission. This formula has long defined American coercive diplomacy and foreign policy, particularly toward Iran. Iran already knows how this ends—not with its own surrender, but with the American regime desperately looking for an exit after every door has been slammed shut.
The exhausted pattern: Threats as a substitute for power
The first point to understand is that Trump's new attack is not something new, but a recycled, failed algorithm that has collapsed repeatedly in the past. Its logic is to threaten overwhelming force to crush an opponent's will to resist, yet history offers a scathing rebuttal. On the last night of the 40-day war, Trump used his most infamous rhetorical weapon—the threat of exterminating Iranian civilization—to enforce a ceasefire. And while the ceasefire was accepted, it was not because Iran buckled but because the US was desperately seeking a truce.
The ceasefire was a tactical break, not a strategic surrender
This ceasefire was a tactical break, not a strategic surrender. Trump confuses Iranian pragmatism with submission and capitulation. He clings to the belief that the threat of genocide yields favorable deals. But in geopolitics, a pattern holds true only when the power dynamics remain stable. Iran has weathered the storm and has emerged stronger.
Diminishing returns of coercive diplomacy
What we are seeing is the diminishing returns of coercive diplomacy. Each subsequent threat carries less weight because disobedience has already been tested. Iran has survived the so-called "maximum pressure" campaign.
Covering up failure with fiction
Why did Trump make dramatic threats again? Because the United States is losing the narrative. Having failed to secure a military victory on the ground, Washington has turned to the only battlefield where it believes it still has a faint chance: crisis management in the international media. Trump needs an image—a glossy, postcard-perfect image of manufactured triumph. He must convince the world that he defeated Iran, that his "upper hand" in the recent war forced Iran to surrender. He must also win the trust of American voters ahead of the November midterm elections, especially as every poll paints a scenario of catastrophe for his party.
The supposedly strong American power has been stripped bare
The hard truth is that the recent war against Iran revealed the limits of American firepower against a determined, local opponent. Unable to achieve a decisive victory—or even an exit that would save its prestige—the American administration manufactured the winner's scenario. The threats are not about changing Iran's behavior, but about reframing the American public's memory. It is an attempt to retrospectively reframe a strategic deadlock as a glorious conquest.
The US fears a deal with Iran
Iran appears ready to finalize a deal, but on terms that cause the US a political defeat deeper than any military loss. If Iran secures a deal that respects its red lines, its sovereignty, and its nuclear rights, Trump's entire "maximum pressure" doctrine collapses into a farce. The threats, therefore, constitute a preemptive strike against this humiliation, which is quickly approaching the US President. Knowing that a bad deal (for the US) is coming, Trump is trying to construct a "false achievement" through psychological operations, hoping to turn a diplomatic fiasco into a victory.
The deadline for the Mundial... all for show
Trump's impatience is not due to a strategic urgency for uranium enrichment or missile range, but to the broadcast schedule of the upcoming Mundial football spectacle. He wants the deal finalized before the start of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, because he desperately wants a "victory" celebration in front of the world's cameras. He longs for the global audience, the billions watching the matches, to see his manufactured "triumph" over Iran. This reduces international diplomacy to a reality TV finale, Trump's favorite arena. The security of the Persian Gulf, the nuclear threshold, and regional stability are now hostages to a viewership trick. The essence of the deal matters less to Trump than the spectacular impression. When this deadline passes without Iran's surrender, his threats escalate.
The ghost of Jimmy Carter: The electoral mirror
To understand the sheer existential terror fueling Trump's threats, one should not look at Iran, but at the graveyard where American presidents reside. Trump is haunted by the ghost of Jimmy Carter, the 39th US President who died just two years ago. Jimmy Carter's downfall was not caused by a lost battle, but by the crisis at the American embassy (a den of espionage) in Tehran. The Iranian revolutionaries delayed at that time. They prolonged the negotiations. They made the American president look weak, day by day, until the electorate voted him out and brought Ronald Reagan to power. Trump sees the current prolonged negotiations with Iran through the same dark mirror. He fears that if Iran does not agree to the terms he desires, if the Iranian leadership delays, the political consequences for him will be devastating.
Time does not favor Trump
The controversial US President does not want to become Jimmy Carter. He knows that a prolonged confrontation, with the Strait of Hormuz in tension and American assets vulnerable, does not end with Iranian submission or retreat. It ends with the further erosion of American prestige and the rise of Democratic opponents who claim they could have done better. Thus, the threats are about domestic political survival as much as international coercion. Trump is racing against the electoral clock, and Iran, by refusing to rush, reveals just how vulnerable Trump's political timeline is.
The war of attrition: Iran's invisible victory
Here lies the fatal flaw in Trump's calculation: he assumes time is an American weapon. Just last week, his administration claimed that "time works in America's favor." However, within seven days, he was shouting about delays and threatening war. This contradiction reeks of desperation and panic. America has recalculated the odds and has discovered that in a war of attrition, Iran undoubtedly wins. Consider the dynamic of the current ceasefire. The status quo—a tense, prolonged ceasefire with the Strait of Hormuz essentially closed to hostile ships—does not benefit the United States, but Iran. Every day that passes without a full-scale war, while the US fails to reopen the strategic waterway of Hormuz on its own terms, is a day that solidifies Iran's position. This transforms the field's dynamics. It proves that the old equation, where the US could strike with impunity while Iran absorbed the blows, is essentially dead.
A new equation is being written
Any aggression, however limited, will be met with a decisive, escalating response from the Islamic Republic of Iran. This is not a deterrent based on equality, but a deterrent forged by unadulterated determination.
The trick of unpredictability
The latest American military aggression in southern Iran, which began and continues under the weak pretext of an Apache helicopter crash in the Strait of Hormuz, is a prime example of a dying power trying to restore a dissolved status quo. The US is desperately seeking to normalize the idea that it can strike Iranian soil without consequences. It seeks to restore the dynamic of the "ultimate perpetrator" in the region's waters. But Iran's response was immediate and powerful, striking American bases in several countries in the region. Iran proved that the "new equation" holds—any act of violation will be met with severe punishments. The US is fighting a battle for "normalization," trying to make daily aggression acceptable. Iran is fighting a battle for "sovereignty," determined to make any violation of its territory or the Strait of Hormuz an unacceptable cost. America insists that Iran cannot exercise recognized sovereignty over a strategic waterway that is practically in Iranian waters. Iran—with legitimate authority—currently manages the Strait of Hormuz. The critical point is that the burden of proof lies with the US, and when it fails to dominate, when it is met with equal or superior determination, the loss proves catastrophic for its global credibility.
The strongman's trap
With his renewed threats, which have already been exhausted, Trump has been cornered. He must either attack fiercely, risking a costly and unpredictable war, or retreat, admitting that his threats are hollow. He tried to construct a "miscalculation" in the minds of Iranian officials, hoping that fear and doubt would lead them to the negotiating table and finalize a deal. But Iranian officials have read this script before. They discern the "enemy's fraud" and recognize that the psychological operation is a failed attempt to regain control of a situation that has already escaped irrevocably. Iran will not bend. And when the dust settles from this latest round of threats, the world will see that the man who shouted that he would strike with terrible force was, in reality, running with his pants down…
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών