Clausewitz warned that once large-scale military operations begin, war tends to generate its own momentum — “each act of force produces a new situation which itself demands another act of force.” Two and a half weeks into Operation Epic Fury, that principle has stopped being theory and become Donald Trump’s daily reality. The Iran war is the first time Trump’s style has made it impossible for him to easily talk or improvise his way out. Unlike tariffs, the war’s outcome is beyond unilateral control.
Wolfgang Munchau’s analysis in UnHerd identifies the structural trap with precision: Trump cannot honestly declare victory, he cannot control the war’s expansion, and the costs of quitting now exceed the costs of staying in. Each of those conditions pushes toward escalation.
The war was supposed to be quick. A source close to the administration said Trump “grossly overestimated his ability to topple the regime short of sending in ground troops.” Now, the logic of escalation has taken over. A senior Trump administration official told Axios: “The Iranians f*cking around with the Strait makes him more dug in.”
The Strait of Hormuz remains effectively closed. Iran’s foreign minister said Monday that Tehran was seeking neither “truce nor talks.” Trump told NBC News that Iran was ready to end the war but that “the terms aren’t good enough yet.” Averaging out timelines from aides, the administration expected a 4-6 week operation. However, officials are now preparing for instability that could continue until September. Israel has informed journalists it plans at least three more weeks of attacks on thousands of additional targets.
The Ground Troop Question
Trump has privately expressed serious interest in deploying U.S. troops on the ground inside Iran, according to U.S. officials and sources with knowledge of the conversations. He has discussed seizing Iran’s uranium materials or taking over strategically important Kharg Island to restart oil passage. As CNN reported, capturing the highly enriched uranium stockpile buried deep underground would require a significant troop presence well beyond a special operations footprint.
The 82nd Airborne Division recently canceled a planned training exercise, fueling speculation that ground combat units are being prepared. However, the polling is devastating:
The Clausewitz Problem
Clausewitz identified interactions in war that drive escalation: the principle of action and reaction, and the need to push the enemy into a worse position than the sacrifice demanded. Each American strike demands an Iranian response — a tanker attacked, a Gulf airport shut down, or a missile striking near the US consul’s residence in Tel Aviv.
To claim victory, the Iranian regime just needs to stay alive. To claim victory, Trump needs a surrender that the regime’s survival depends on refusing. Iranians have signaled that even if Trump stops the bombing, they could continue shooting until they receive permanent guarantees. Trump cannot simply walk away; the war will follow him home through regional retaliation and political humiliation.
The Trap With No Exit
Munchau’s analysis converges with what has been called Trump’s “escalation trap”—where a stronger force is incentivized to keep attacking to demonstrate dominance amid diminishing returns. Trump expected a swift “decapitation” similar to his rhetoric on Venezuela; instead, he got a younger, angrier Khamenei, $100 oil, and a public that likes the war less each day.
Some in his inner circle now have “buyer’s remorse.” But stopping without securing the strait would be read as defeat, while securing the strait without ground forces may be impossible. Clausewitz wrote that war tends to “usurp the place of policy.” Trump believed he could control the trajectory through force of personality; seventeen days in, the war is controlling him.
By ThinkTanksMonitor
