Both supporters and opponents of the Iran war are making critical strategic errors
Source: Eliot A. Cohen. "One War, Two Mistakes - The Atlantic." March 17, 2026. www.theatlantic.com
The Gist
The author argues that people on both sides of the Iran war debate are wrong. Supporters ignore how badly Trump has handled building support at home and with allies, which is crucial for winning wars. Opponents ignore that Iran is genuinely dangerous and that all previous peaceful approaches have failed.
Conclusion
Both advocates and opponents of the current Iran war are making significant mistakes in their analysis and approach
Premises
- War advocates wrongly dismiss the Trump administration's failure to build domestic support and alliance management as minor issues
- Maintaining domestic support is essential to victory in any war because outcomes are inherently uncertain
- The Trump administration has thoroughly botched domestic politics by failing to secure congressional authorization, deliver coherent speeches, or manage allies effectively
- War opponents fail to acknowledge that Iran poses a severe and persistent threat that all previous approaches have failed to address
- Iran has developed dangerous military capabilities, sponsors terrorism globally, and remains irrevocably hostile to the US and Israel
- Previous strategies toward Iran including ignoring, sanctions, small retaliations, and diplomatic agreements have all failed
- The consequences of inaction could include nuclear proliferation in the Middle East and unchecked Iranian aggression
Assumptions
- Historical precedents about wartime leadership apply to current conflicts
- Domestic support and alliance management are crucial for military success
- Iran's past behavior predicts future behavior
- Military action can be effective if properly managed politically
- The threat from Iran justifies military intervention despite political mismanagement