Trump Aims To End Iran’s War On America — On His Terms

Security experts told the Daily Caller that President Donald Trump’s latest operation in Iran is part of a broader strategy to cripple Tehran’s ability to threaten the United States and its allies while weakening hostile powers dependent on the regime.

On February 28, President Donald Trump announced in a morning video statement that U.S. and Israeli forces had launched significant combat operations against Iran as part of Operation Epic Fury.

Experts say the conflict fits into Trump’s broader “peace through strength” foreign policy, arguing that a decisive strike against Iran could reshape not only the Middle East but also America’s standing against larger adversaries such as China and Russia.

“For more than a decade now, President Trump has expressed immense frustration with the tendency of most U.S. presidents to allow conflict and hostilities to simmer in ways that destabilize entire regions and harm U.S. interests,” William Thibeau, director of the U.S. Military Project at the Claremont Institute, told the caller.

Thibeau said the operation reflects Trump’s ambition to resolve not only the conflict between the United States and Iran, but also broader global conflicts.

“This means short-term escalation in the hope of more permanent peace and a real pivot to other regions, much closer to the thesis of the administration’s national security and national defense strategies,” he added.

The administration also laid out evolving goals for the conflict, suggesting the operation aims to do much more than simply punish Tehran.

Trump said in a second video message that the United States must achieve several goals before leaving Iran. War Secretary Pete Hegseth told the Caller that those goals include ending Iran’s ability to project power against America and its allies, as well as depriving the regime of its ability to create and possess a nuclear weapon.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt expanded on these goals, citing the destruction of Iran’s navy, preventing the country from making and using IEDs or roadside bombs, and killing terrorists.

The operation follows strikes the administration launched in June against Iran in what it called “Operation Midnight Hammer.” The strikes came after Israel first engaged in direct conflict with Iran, and the United States sent B-2 bombers to strike three key nuclear facilities. The administration told reporters at the time that the strikes had “destroyed” the nuclear sites.

Rocket trails are visible in the sky above the central Israeli coastal city of Netanya, amid a new barrage of Iranian missile attacks, March 9, 2026. (Photo by JACK GUEZ/AFP via Getty Images)

But administration officials told reporters in recent telephone conversations that Iran is beginning to replenish its nuclear stockpiles. During negotiations with the United States, Iran also reportedly made clear that it believed it had the right to enrich uranium. (RELATED: ‘No choice’ – US officials say Iran forced their hand after rebuilding its nuclear program)

Jacob Olidort, director of U.S. security at the America First Policy Institute, told the Caller that Operation Epic Fury reflects a broader logic than the previous strike.

“Midnight Hammer has been accused of suppressing Iran’s nuclear capability… [Operation Epic Fury] It was more of a holistic reason,” Olidort told the caller.

“The important point is that [Midnight Hammer] did not remove Iran’s intention to rebuild…these threats persisted,” he added.[Iran] sought to act in a way that would threaten the American people.

Peter Doran, a deputy senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told the caller that Trump’s strikes stem from a desire to permanently dismantle the Iranian regime.

“When the Islamic Republic murdered 30,000 of its own citizens in a matter of weeks, that really struck a chord,” Doran told the caller, emphasizing Trump’s commitment to enforcing past threats and ending the regime for good.

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA – MARCH 1: A man holds photos of Reza Pahlavi, son of the former Shah of Iran while another man holds a photo of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Donald Trump as people hold up the pre-1979 Iranian Islamic Revolution while members of the Iranian community celebrate in front of the federal building on March 1, 2026 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Apu Gomes/Getty Images)

Doran also pushed back on concerns from Trump supporters who say the operation contradicts the president’s anti-war campaign pledges, pointing to Trump’s inaugural rhetoric.

He explained: “[The president] promised at his inauguration to measure America’s success not only by the battles we win, but also by the ones we end. »

Questions remain about the precise timing of the operation. Axios reported that Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu believed they had the best chance of killing Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his entourage in the February 28 operation.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted that Israel’s intention to strike Iran initially played a role in the timing of the operation, but later toned down that statement. Other administration officials said the decision to strike was solely the decision of the United States.

Experts told the Daily Caller that the operation could also have repercussions far beyond Iran, weakening key U.S. adversaries and helping Trump shift U.S. attention and resources elsewhere.

“By speaking directly to clerics in Iran, we are witnessing the birthing pangs of a more peaceful Middle East, which alone will allow the United States to reallocate massive military and financial resources out of the Middle East and elsewhere in the world where they are needed, including in Asia,” Doran told the caller.

Thibeau said that while China would likely continue its expansion regardless, instability involving Iran could complicate Beijing’s position.

“China depends on Iran for 10 to 20 percent of its national energy supply, so changing its access to that oil is not insignificant. Generally speaking, any future confrontation with China in the Pacific, as many believe, will require a concentration and prioritization of resources and organizational bandwidth,” Thibeau told the caller.

“It is difficult to imagine achieving such a focus if Iran continues to pose such a threat in the Middle East, especially in a country with nuclear ambitions,” Thibeau said, emphasizing that the United States will still need to quickly build up its military capabilities.

Olidort also said China was not the immediate reason for the attack on Iran, but argued the operation could further weaken hostile powers aligned with Tehran. He cited Iran’s support for other regimes as an example, saying that if Putin lost a military supply line, strikes in Iran could impact the war between Russia and Ukraine.

The recent actions underscore what some experts see as a broader trend in Trump’s approach to national security. Two months ago, the Trump administration ousted Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro. Tensions with Cuba are also increasing, even if an agreement still seems possible.

“I can sum it up in one word: oil,” Doran told the caller. He described Venezuela, Iran and Russia as China’s main oil suppliers, followed potentially by Cuba.

“He will lose a third [supplier] in Iran if this operation succeeds, and that will leave Vladimir Putin very alone and isolated, and that is precisely where the president needs to put him if he wants to exert maximum diplomatic pressure to end the war in Ukraine and resolve the one conflict that he truly and deeply desires to end, which is the fighting between Moscow and kyiv,” Doran told the caller.