April 2, 2026

SHARE |

Where is the War in Iran Heading? Trump’s Speech Sheds Light on U.S. Endgame

Doug Mills/The New York Times via AP Pool

On Wednesday night, U.S. President Donald Trump addressed the nation to provide an update on the conflict with Iran. During the speech, Trump claimed that the U.S. had destroyed Iran’s navy and air force, leaving the country “decimated” militarily and economically. Trump claimed that the command and control of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was also being “decimated as we speak,” and that the United States’ core strategic objectives are “nearing completion.” Trump emphasized that these objectives “never” included regime change, while also claiming that “regime change occurred” because the killings of Iranian leaders over the past month had left less extreme and “more reasonable” figures in place. In reality, however, regime change was often presented as a broader goal by both Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In announcing Operation Epic Fury, Trump and Netanyahu encouraged Iranians to use the attack as an opportunity to unseat the regime. Moreover, the killings of Iranian leaders — many of them carried out by the Israeli military — did not produce more moderate leadership; earlier assessments by The Soufan Center found that they instead left more hardline Iranian officials in place.

Ahead of his speech, rumors abounded about what the President would cover in his announcement. While earlier in the day, the Atlantic reported that U.S. military officials were planning for a ground assault centered around Kharg Island, which hosts about 90 percent of Iran’s oil exports, or to send Special Operations Forces into the mainland to seize uranium, President Trump told reporters at Reuters that “I don't care about the nuclear material in Iran. We'll watch it via satellite.” Trump also told Reuters that “the United States will be ‘out of Iran pretty ?quickly’ and could return for ‘spot hits’ if needed.”

On Tuesday, Trump stated that the U.S. would be leaving Iran “within two weeks ... maybe three,” adding that Iran “doesn’t have to make a deal,” since the U.S. had already achieved its goal of preventing Iran from nuclear proliferation — although such a goal was allegedly accomplished after the 12-Day War in June. The next day, Trump posted on Truth Social that “Iran’s New Regime President ... has just asked the United States of America for a CEASEFIRE!” The “new” President that Trump references is Masoud Pezeshkian, who is not new, and who in a letter to the American people encouraged U.S. citizens to question how their interests are served from this conflict, while also portraying the Iranian response as defensive stating that “no country confronted with such conditions would forgo strengthening its defensive capabilities.” Moreover, it remains unclear how much sway Pezeshkian has among Iran’s surviving leadership, especially hardliners. Nevertheless, in line with some of his earlier statements, Trump’s address suggests that the U.S. indeed remains open to diplomacy, but that it is preparing in some ways to wind down its engagement in Iran, as it had, according to Trump achieved its objectives which was to cripple the Iranian military and its nuclear capabilities.

In his Wednesday night speech Trump also addressed nations who buy their oil from the Middle East, telling them to “buy oil from the United States of America ... build up some delayed courage ... go to the Strait and just take it ... the hard part is done so it should be easy,” alluding to European NATO allies who he had chastised over the past days for not participating in efforts to re-open the Strait. In a social media post Tuesday, Trump lashed out at European nations, singling out the UK to “go get your own oil.” Wednesday morning, Trump also told reporters at Reuters that he would use his speech to “express his disgust with NATO,” and that he was considering withdrawing from the organization. Despite the fact that Trump did not overtly address his stated desire to withdraw from the treaty organization, the bifurcation of NATO is in full force. Trump has labeled the Iran War as a ‘test’ for NATO allies that they have not passed. Refusal to join the military campaign against Iran — as well as refusal to let U.S. military assets move over their territories for offensive action against Iran — has plunged the Alliance to its most uncertain point yet. On Tuesday, France refused to allow American air assets used against Iran to pass through French airspace, to which the Israeli government has responded by halting all French weapons imports.

Over the past weeks, the lack of European military engagement in the Persian Gulf has featured prominently in Donald Trump’s remarks. This is not the first time in NATO’s history that a rift over U.S.-led foreign military intervention reveals the divergence in foreign policy preferences by different states. The 2003 invasion of Iraq was notoriously contentious among the allies, and some European capitals diverged significantly from the U.S. perspective on the issue of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in Iraq and any alleged links between then Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. Nonetheless, Trump’s escalating rhetoric diverges from prior disagreements within the alliance, and the future of NATO has been openly debated by the President and the U.S. National Security Advisor.

NATO countries have been hit hard by the ongoing war in Iran, specifically from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. On Wednesday morning, the European Commission released a statement encouraging citizens of EU countries to work from home and roll back their driving (and flying) time, emphasizing that this was a “very serious situation.” Reporters from POLITICO said that this speech echoed the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that the EU was bracing for an energy crisis “with no clear end in sight.” Alongside the EU, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, in a rare occurrence, addressed the nation with his own speech about the energy crisis that Australians must brace for. Albanese told Australians: “The war in the Middle East has caused the biggest spike in petrol and diesel prices in history. Australia is not an active participant in this war. But all Australians are paying higher prices because of it.” He also encouraged citizens to conserve energy by taking public transit and to not stock up on fuel, announcing that the Australian national cabinet would cut domestic taxes on fuel in half. Across Asia as well, countries have already had to make broad adjustments to conserve energy, curbing non-essential spending, limiting travel, and encouraging work from home in countries like Jordan, Thailand, and Bangladesh.

In his own national address prior to Trump’s speech, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced yesterday that his Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper would host a virtual summit of 35 countries to discuss efforts to abate the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz. Starmer claimed the meeting would “assess all viable diplomatic and political measures that we can take to restore freedom of navigation, guarantee the safety of trapped ships and seafarers, and resume the movement of vital commodities.” The meeting builds upon a joint statement that was released on March 19 that condemns the closure of the Strait and Iranian attacks on ships and energy infrastructure in the region. Reporting by the Financial Times mentions that British military planners will also be meeting this week to discuss naval options including military escorts and minesweeping operations.

These measures are certainly important, as Trump’s insistence in his Wednesday night speech that the U.S. can rely on its own oil and energy production — together with Venezuela — and that it has already achieved its core objectives, suggests that Washington plans to withdraw from Iran shortly and is willing to leave the Strait of Hormuz off the table. In effect, Trump’s message was that the United States can sustain its own economic and energy ecosystem, while countries dependent on regional exports will either have to buy from the United States or manage the Strait themselves. While Trump explicitly thanked U.S. allies in the Persian Gulf for their cooperation and allyship, an expedited U.S. withdrawal without securing the Strait will leave many of these countries, whose economies are dependent on energy exports, in the lurch.