Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
  • Analysis
    • Policy Papers
    • Symposia
    • Q&A
    • Polls
    • Grand Strategy Explained
    • Target Taiwan
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / US-Israel-Iran / Trump’s assumptions are running his Iran policy aground—again
US‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

May 1, 2026

Trump’s assumptions are running his Iran policy aground—again

By Daniel DePetris

President Trump’s April 21 decision on to extend his original two-week ceasefire with Iran, less than 12 hours after he expressed reluctance to do precisely that, is giving the U.S. and Iran more time to salvage a diplomatic process defined by misleading statements, rhetorical chest-thumping, and conflicting agendas.

While shooting has stopped for the time being, the standoff over the Strait of Hormuz remains. The good news is that neither the United States’ nor Iran’s best interests are served by a long-term conflict, which suggests both sides are at the very least keen to keep the diplomatic option open in order to determine whether a settlement to the nearly two-month long war is possible. The bad news is that Trump’s poor assumptions about how Iran would react to U.S. pressure tactics have led to poor decisions and a conflict in the Persian Gulf whose outcome remains in doubt. Far from squeezing Iranian leaders into concessions, the U.S. president has repeatedly ceded leverage in negotiation.

Trump is notoriously unpredictable on a lot of subjects, but he’s been quite consistent on Iran throughout his presidency. His objective is clear: to prevent the country from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden all had a similar policy, even if they adopted different strategies for getting there. The difference is Trump’s unwillingness to adapt, his propensity to wield the stick without the carrot, and most of all, his unwarranted confidence in his assumptions.

Trump’s blunders have made the goal harder. The first occurred in 2018, when he withdrew the United States from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal negotiated by the Obama administration. Trump, who said JCPOA offered too much relief from sanctions while imposing too few limits on Tehran’s nuclear activity, launched a “maximum-pressure” strategy on Iran’s leaders that sought to prevent Iranian oil from reaching the global market and to cut off Iranian-linked banks from the international financial system. The hope was that Ali Khamenei, the Iranian supreme leader at the time, would come back to the table on U.S. terms.

Read at Defense One

Author

Photo of Daniel DePetris

Daniel
DePetris

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

Q&ABasing and global posture, Iran, Middle East, Military analysis

What does the precision revolution mean for U.S. grand strategy?

By Benjamin Friedman

October 10, 2026

In the mediaChina, Asia, China‑Taiwan, Grand strategy, Middle East

Great power cooperation in a fragmented world

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

October 8, 2026

Op-edUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

Reopening the Strait of Hormuz leaves US with mixed success

By Daniel DePetris

September 30, 2026

In the mediaUS‑Israel‑Iran, Basing and global posture, Middle East, Military analysis

After Iran war damage, U.S. may close some Middle East bases for good

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh

September 29, 2026

In the mediaMiddle East

Precision weapons made U.S. bases vulnerable—and less necessary, report says

Featuring Benjamin Friedman

September 25, 2026

ExplainerIran, Basing and global posture, Middle East, Military analysis

The proliferation of accuracy and vulnerability of military bases

By Benjamin Friedman

September 24, 2026

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

Defense Priorities Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization supported entirely by American individuals and foundations—no funding comes from the U.S. government or any foreign government. Donations are unlimited and deductible for Federal Income Tax purposes.

  • Experts
  • Papers
  • Symposia
  • Q&A
  • Polls
  • Events
  • Media
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • About
  • Jobs
  • Contact
  • Donate
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.