Unless Donald Trump stops swinging between claims of imminent victory and threats of escalation, and unless all sides move immediately towards an off-ramp, this war will not wind down soon—instead, it is likely to widen. The battlefield already tells that story. Critical infrastructure is increasingly being hit—drones hit Kuwait’s Al Ahmadi refinery, while a US strike on a bridge near Tehran killed civilians celebrating Nowruz. Iran, far from being weakened, is demonstrating both reach and resilience—militarily across the region and diplomatically through a narrative of civilian losses. This reality sits uneasily against Trump’s claim that the war is “very close” to completion.
The problem is not just of overconfidence; it is the absence of a clear endgame. What constitutes success? Degradation of Iran’s military capacity, regime destabilisation, or securing maritime flows through the Strait of Hormuz? Each path implies different commitments and timelines. Without clarity, “victory” becomes a flexible claim rather than a measurable strategic outcome. That ambiguity is now feeding escalation. Trump’s latest address paired assurances of a near-term finish with warnings of intensified strikes, including against Iran’s power infrastructure. The message is contradictory. For adversaries, it signals unpredictability. For allies, it complicates alignment.
Meanwhile, Iran retains its most potent lever: energy disruption. Its ability to threaten traffic through the Hormuz Strait continues to send ripples through global markets. Moves at the UN Security Council to authorise defensive measures for shipping, alongside parallel diplomacy involving Gulf States and major powers, reflect a growing expectation that the conflict will persist. Dynamics in Washington add another layer of uncertainty. The abrupt removal of senior US Army leadership in the middle of an active conflict raises questions about continuity and coherence at the top of the command chain.
The risk is not just of a longer war, but a wider one—geographically, economically and politically. A conflict being touted as nearing its end is, in reality, looks like expanding in scope and consequence. Unless rhetoric aligns with strategy, and strategy with conditions on the ground, the gap between what is promised and what is unfolding will only grow. And in that gap lies the real danger of a war drifting forward without a clear path towards its end.