Trump's Strategy in Iran: A Path Towards Protracted War?

US President Donald Trump has been quite explicit in describing the new phase of war across the Persian Gulf. Iran, Trump stated following the latest wave of major US attacks, is attempting to rebuild its radar systems.

“So we wait until they are almost finished being rebuilt, then we hit them,” he said.

On Tuesday (1/9), US forces attacked several targets in Iran again. According to CENTCOM, the strikes destroyed, among other things, radar and air defence systems, maritime facilities, sea mining capabilities, and communication facilities belonging to the military and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

“Mowing the grass”

Iran retaliated with missiles and drones targeting US facilities in Middle Eastern countries. Thus, what CENTCOM described a few days earlier as a possible strategy for the next phase of war is beginning to materialise.

According to the news portal Axios, the limited attacks, which can be carried out repeatedly if necessary, aim to prevent Iran from restoring its military capabilities around the Strait of Hormuz.

A US government official described the idea using a term known in Israeli security policy: “mowing the grass.”

The metaphor describes a strategy that, from the outset, does not promise absolute victory over an opponent. It is sufficient to periodically reduce their military capabilities until the threat remains manageable. When the grass grows back, it is “mowed” again.

If applied to Iran, this means the United States will monitor which military capabilities the adversary is rebuilding, then strike when those capabilities exceed a certain threshold.

Success with an expiry date

In recent months, the United States has indeed achieved several military successes. US forces have significantly reduced Iran’s military capabilities around the Strait of Hormuz and have begun clearing Iranian sea mines.

However, these successes are not permanent. Tehran is repairing or reacquiring radar systems, air defence positions, and anti-ship missiles.

American bombs may be able to destroy key Iranian positions at specific points. However, Iran’s knowledge and military technology industrial base remain intact.

Rebuilding can be delayed, but not prevented. The United States continues to face the same choice: allow Tehran to restore its capabilities or strike again and destroy them?

In April, Middle East expert Mona Yacoubian from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington warned of the consequences. Such developments, she said, could lead to a “protracted low-intensity conflict interspersed with more intensive interventions.”

A warning of war

The “mowing the grass” strategy also has its limits. One reason is that the strategy was not designed from the start to face war against a nation-state. Israel developed this strategy to deal with non-state actors such as the terrorist group Hamas.

Against an opponent with the character of a state and stronger capabilities, Yacunbian says, “mowing the grass” could turn into an “obsolete military strategy.” This is most evident in the Strait of Hormuz.

The United States must ensure the strait remains open. Iran, conversely, only needs to make people believe that traversing it remains dangerous. Even an adversary that is militarily much weaker can still impose a heavy cost on Washington.

The United States also faces another problem: Washington can determine the intensity of its own attacks, but it cannot determine how Tehran will retaliate. President Trump has repeatedly warned Tehran in harsh language not to launch military counterattacks.

However, despite the warnings, the regime in Tehran immediately launched missiles at US facilities in the region. Jordan alone reported 13 ballistic missiles entering its airspace, ten of which were intercepted.

The nuclear issue

Middle East expert Yacoubian warned of much greater risks from repeated American attacks. Tehran may conclude that the only way to build a permanent deterrent is “by pursuing nuclear weapons.”

As a result, the United States and Israel may instead accelerate the very development they seek to control through attacks on Iran.

From Washington’s perspective, the options available to Trump are not much better. If the president allows Iran to rebuild its military capabilities around the Strait of Hormuz, he risks facing new attacks on ships and disruptions to one of the world’s most important energy routes.

The impact on the global economy is well known. Despite ongoing turmoil and repeated negotiations, political agreements between Washington and Tehran have so far failed due to seemingly irreconcilable differences.

US-Iran “endless war”?

However, the “mowing the grass” strategy has domestic political appeal for Donald Trump, amidst various uncertainties in foreign policy. The US President can execute it without occupation, nation-building, or a massive deployment of American ground troops.

At the same time, this strategy allows Trump to maintain distance from what he calls “forever wars”—the endless wars he has repeatedly accused his predecessors in the White House of conducting.

Ultimately, the way considered a method to avoid endless war could instead turn into that very endless war. Yacoubian refers to “mowing the grass” as a “Sisyphus strategy: endless erosion.”

As long as Washington is unwilling to at some point accept the reality that Iran is rebuilding its military capabilities, every successful strike will merely create a reason for the next one.