The Memo: On Iran, Trump’s critics see tough talk as a mask for frustration
The Hill · C · trust 65/100
Comments: by Niall Stanage - 08/19/26 6:00 AM ET Comments: Link copied by Niall Stanage - 08/19/26 6:00 AM ET Comments: Link copied NOW PLAYING President Trump is talking tough on Iran — but his critics say it’s evidence of frustration rather than strength almost six months on from the start of the conflict.
On Tuesday, Trump sought to evince a confidence that the U.S. has the upper hand. He implied Tehran will bend to his will in the end and that oil prices and global commerce won’t be overly affected in the interim.
“There are no talks or conversations going on, or scheduled, with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Naval Blockade remains in full force and effect. The Hormuz Strait is open and operating. All water mines have been removed or detonated,” he wrote in a morning social media post .
There was less calmness apparent Monday when Trump addressed negotiations between Iran and Oman in comments to Trey Yingst of Fox News.
“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the s‑‑‑ out of them,” Trump said.
Separately on Monday, Trump reiterated his earlier claim that he would consider claiming the vital Strait of Hormuz as U.S. territory.
“We control it with the blockade, and I like the idea of declaring it a territory,” he said in the Oval Office .
The suggestion of making the shipping channel a U.S. territory elicits eye rolls from most foreign policy experts, who argue that it’s not clear how this would be achieved or what practical difference it would make.
Iran’s de facto control over the important strait has roiled global markets, sent oil prices up, and pushed the average price for a gallon of gas in the U.S. above $4. The national average was just under $3 when a joint U.S.-Israel attack on Iran started the war in late February.
The price of benchmark West Texas Intermediate crude oil ticked up again Tuesday, reaching more than $85 by late afternoon. Although this is down from an April peak of more than $112, it is significantly up from around $66 just before the war began.
Unease on financial markets was also evident in another important way Tuesday, as the yield on 30-year U.S. Treasurys reached its highest level in almost two decades.
For all of Trump’s talk, his critics say, his central dilemma remains knotty.
Having begun a war of choice, he has seen the conflict stretch out much longer and more inconclusively than he hoped.
Now, broadly speaking, he has three options. He could ramp up military action in a way that he would hope to be decisive, but that would pose grave risks, including to American lives. He could seek to make peace right away, but that would likely require concessions that would be unpopular with hawks in his own party. Or he could seek a middle course, keeping economic pressure on the Islamic Republic but accepting it could take several months, at a minimum, for such a push to yield results.
None of those options is particularly appealing nor is success guaranteed by any of them.
“By some counts, things have gotten worse,” said Allison McManus, managing director of national security and international policy at the liberal Center for American Progress. “The war has become a quagmire, Trump did not achieve any of his objectives, and the United States has diminished leverage.”
Trump’s defenders would counter that some objectives have been achieved, especially when it comes to eroding Iran’s military capabilities and inflicting serious damage on its navy and air force.
That said, the war’s unpopularity with the American public tells its own story. The share of Americans who think it was the wrong decision to go to war with Iran outnumber those who think it was the right choice by more than 2-to-1, according to a poll released Tuesday from The Economist and YouGov . The poll found 57 percent of Americans think it was the wrong decision and just 25 percent think it was the right one.
Furthermore, any suggestion that the Islamic Republic’s leadership would collapse or that it would “cry uncle,” as Trump put it in April , has largely gone by the wayside.
Meanwhile, Monday’s profane remark about Oman seemed rather desperate to some. The small Persian Gulf nation has seemingly incurred Trump’s wrath because of the possibility that it could come to an agreement with Iran on the Strait of Hormuz that would leave the U.S. frozen out.
“Trump appears increasingly frustrated, lashing out not only at Iran but now at Oman, a longtime U.S. ally that has genuinely tried to stay out of this war and mediate an end to it. That is more a sign of his narrowing options than of strength,” said Negar Mortazavi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy.
Joel Rubin, who served as a deputy assistant secretary of State during the Obama administration, was equally critical of Trump’s overall approach. But Rubin also suggested that there were some elements of the picture that Trump’s harshest critics were overlooking.
He argued that Iran could be overplaying its hand.
“The Iranians are a little bit too gleeful about their situation, considering how much of a punishing they have taken,” he said.
He also argued Trump may have had more success in weakening Iranian proxies than is fully appreciated.
Rubin cited the increasing intolerance of governments in Lebanon for Hezbollah and in Iraq for assorted Iranian militias. He also noted Hamas’s apparent willingness to sign up to a disarmament deal in Gaza, albeit one that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rejected.
Even so, Rubin said, the fundamental effort to achieve U.S goals in Iran itself was in “strategic free-fall” — a problem that he argued was exacerbated by Trump’s volatility.
“We have a tactical manager in the White House changing direction every other day,” he said.
…
Read the original at The Hill →
Open in TruthVane →