At a cabinet meeting at Camp David, US President Donald Trump declared that the United States is prepared to significantly escalate military pressure on Iran.<\/p>\n
Reaffirming his stance, he stated, \u201cWe\u2019re going to hit them very hard. Eventually, they\u2019ll reach a point where they say, \u2018We can\u2019t go on anymore.\u2019\u201d He added, \u201cWe just want to win.\u201d<\/p>\n
US media outlets have reported that Trump is reviewing<\/a> \u2013 or has already ordered \u2013 the preparation of a new phase of military operations against the Iranian regime. According to those reports, the campaign could begin as early as this weekend, with its primary focus on Iran\u2019s energy infrastructure, including power plants, oil refineries, and the national electricity grid.<\/p>\n For obvious security reasons, the final decision on executing these strikes is expected only hours before launch.<\/p>\n Taken together, these developments signal that Washington\u2019s strategic messaging has entered a new phase. The next stage of this war is no longer confined to striking IRGC military installations or Iran\u2019s nuclear infrastructure. In reality, the principal objective is no longer simply the destruction of Iran\u2019s nuclear program; it is the erosion of the regime\u2019s governing<\/a> capacity.<\/p>\n The strategic emphasis has now shifted decisively toward Iran\u2019s critical energy infrastructure in an effort to push the regime into a corner. Such pressure on Iran\u2019s ruling dictatorship could also ignite another wave of nationwide public unrest \u2013 particularly after nearly half a century in which the Islamic Republic has failed to deliver meaningful development or prosperity for the Iranian people. Instead, the regime has become a source of perpetual crisis, confrontation, and instability.<\/p>\n Many Iranians would welcome the humiliation, defeat, and eventual surrender of the ruling establishment. Although disrupting the regime\u2019s vital infrastructure would inevitably impose temporary hardships on society, many opponents of the Islamic Republic regard such suffering as comparable to the pains of childbirth \u2013 a difficult but necessary transition that could ultimately lead to the regime\u2019s collapse.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Tehran\u2019s propaganda machine has promised broad retaliation, warning that attacks on critical infrastructure will be met with a severe response. These statements amount to an indirect acknowledgment that the regime is preparing for a wider confrontation with the United States and Israel.<\/p>\n They also raise the possibility that Tehran could activate dormant terrorist cells or other asymmetric capabilities inside the United States and the West \u2013 an area in which the Islamic Republic has accumulated decades of experience.<\/p>\n The four strategic aspects needed to curb Iran\u2019s leaders<\/p>\n From a national security perspective, the coming phase of military operations appears to rest on four strategic objectives. The first is to cripple the regime\u2019s already fragile governing capacity: power plants, oil refineries, electricity transmission networks, and energy hubs are not merely economic facilities \u2013 they form the backbone of command, logistics, and the continuity of state operations.<\/p>\n The second objective is to degrade Iran\u2019s military sustainment capability: electricity and fuel are essential to the country\u2019s defense industries, missile systems, maintenance facilities, and logistical supply chains, meaning the purpose is not merely to inflict economic damage but to diminish the regime\u2019s operational military capacity.<\/p>\n The third objective is to increase strategic pressure on Tehran by raising the cost of continued confrontation and forcing the leadership to reconsider its political calculations rather than simply destroying physical infrastructure.<\/p>\n The fourth objective is regional deterrence: a multilayered campaign of this nature sends a clear message to other regional actors that attacks against the United States and its allies may carry far greater consequences than conventional military retaliation.<\/p>\n Trump\u2019s broader objective appears to be compelling Tehran to surrender and return to negotiations. In my assessment, however, the ideological rigidity, fanaticism, and illusions of the Shi\u2019ite clerical establishment make such an outcome unlikely. The regime has repeatedly demonstrated that it would rather see Iran devastated than abandon what it considers its revolutionary ideology.<\/p>\n