‘Effects Will Last Decades’: How Iran War Could Iran War Could Undermine US Military Edge

Last Updated:March 14, 2026, 17:47 IST

Analysts warn the US lacks a clear objective in its conflict with Iran, risking long-term impacts. Trump’s approach and reduced agency coordination complicate the response.

Analysts are raising concerns over the political strategy behind the United States’ war with Iran, warning that while the military operations have been effective, Washington lacks a clearly defined objective for the conflict and will have a long-term negative impact on the American armed forces.

Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at the Washington-based think tank Defense Priorities, said the long-term impact could reshape US military posture.

“The long-term consequences could be significant," she said. “This kind of sustained conflict could affect the United States’ ability to project power for years, if not decades."

Michael Rubin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said the military execution of the campaign had been strong but criticised the absence of a coherent political strategy guiding the strikes.

“The military planning has been strong," Rubin said. “But politically this is becoming increasingly chaotic because the United States appears to have targeting strategies without a clearly defined goal."

Since the US began building up forces in the region earlier this year, the stated objectives of the mission have shifted several times — from backing anti-government protests in Iran to dismantling Tehran’s nuclear programme, destroying its ballistic missile systems, and most recently reopening the Strait of Hormuz after Iran shut the critical oil shipping route.

Michael Singh, a former senior director for Middle East affairs at the US National Security Council under President George W Bush, said each of these objectives would normally require a different military strategy.

With Iran now closing the Strait of Hormuz, Singh noted that Tehran could increasingly influence how long the conflict lasts.

“The other side gets a vote in how and when the conflict ends," he said.

Analysts have also pointed to President Donald Trump’s governing approach as a factor complicating the US response. After returning to office, Trump launched a sweeping effort to dismantle what he described as the Washington foreign policy “deep state", reducing the role of career officials across government agencies.

Within months, the National Security Council was significantly downsized, while the State Department underwent major layoffs under Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Former US defence official Mara Karlin said the limited coordination across agencies may have contributed to the chaotic early days of the conflict, including the absence of clear evacuation plans for American citizens in the region.

“Operational secrecy is important," Karlin said. “But you also need systems in place so that the government can respond when events escalate."

The criticism comes as the conflict with Iran expands and the United States faces growing military, economic and diplomatic challenges in the region.

Trump has also acknowledged the difficulty of achieving regime change in Iran. While he initially suggested that figures inside the country might seize power, many potential successors were reportedly killed during the early strikes.

Iran’s internal security forces have also suppressed public protests.

“They literally have people in the streets with machine guns shooting protesters," Trump said, suggesting that internal opposition faces major obstacles.

The expanding conflict has also forced the Pentagon to shift military resources from other theatres, including air-defence systems originally deployed in Asia to deter threats from North Korea and China.

Some analysts warn that the prolonged conflict could strain US military capabilities and weaken its ability to respond to future crises.

News world ‘Effects Will Last Decades’: How Iran War Could Iran War Could Undermine US Military Edge

Read More