The contradictory statements of him and the leadership of the Pentagon intensify the uncertainty about its course and outcome.
Allies, markets and politicians are scrambling to decipher when and how the conflict might end, while each week that passes without a clear prospect of a solution deepens the economic impact on the US and increases global instability, as reported by .
Trump himself, speaking to Republicans recently, declared that the US had “already won the war” but admitted that “we haven’t won enough”, hours after his contrary assessment that the war was “pretty much complete, almost”. The sequence of these statements creates a confusing backdrop for Washington’s real strategy.
1. Negotiated Armistice and Nuclear Agreement
Ending Iran’s nuclear program has been one of Trump’s key goals since the start of Operation Epic Fury.
Iran and the US held three rounds of indirect nuclear talks in Geneva days before the war began, but Trump’s envoys concluded that Tehran had no serious intentions of striking a deal.
Trump said Monday on Fox News that resuming talks was “likely” but that he was disappointed by the selection of hardliner Mojtaba Khamenei to succeed his late father as supreme leader.
2. The Venezuelan model
Trump has pointed to Venezuela — where the US arrested President Nicolás Maduro in January and established a working relationship with his successor, Vice President Delcy Rodríguez — as a model for Iran.
Trump said on Monday that he believed Iran “made a big mistake” in appointing Mojtaba Khamenei and hinted that the new supreme leader might not last.
Geography aside, the comparison between Iran and Venezuela has important limits. Experts say treating them as equals is a misinterpretation of the Islamic Republic’s power structure.
The regime has survived 47 years of sanctions, wars and internal uprisings — consolidating its position with military, religious and political institutions designed to outlast any leader.
For Iranian protesters who risked their lives to demand regime change, a US-backed leader from within the system could be seen as betrayal rather than liberation.
3. Popular uprising and collapse of the regime
The possibility of collapse is real. Ayatollah Khamenei is dead, the economy has collapsed and Iran has seen its biggest protests since the 1979 revolution just weeks before the war began.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu described the attacks as “creating conditions for the brave Iranian people to take their fate into their own hands.”
Yes, but the Iranian opposition has no unified leader and no organized force on the ground. Exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi is among the most popular opposition figures, but Trump has undermined his credibility — in part because Pahlavi has not lived in Iran for nearly 50 years.
Kurdish forces backed by Israel could provide some support on the ground, but the risks are significant — including the possibility that Iran could be plunged into a civil war like the one that has ravaged Syria for a decade.
4. Intervention of special forces in stockpiles of nuclear weapons
The US and Israel have discussed sending special forces to Iran to secure or destroy its stockpile of enriched uranium, Axios’ Barak Ravid and Marc Caputo report.
This scenario does not end the war with a political solution, but with the physical elimination of the nuclear threat. However, doing so would require sending troops to a country that still actively launches ballistic missiles.
5. Trump declares victory and retires
In this scenario, Trump decides that Iran’s missile and drone capabilities have been sufficiently degraded, declares a historic victory, and withdraws — regardless of whether the underlying political situation in Tehran is resolved or not.
Markets are betting on a quick exit, especially as economic woes at home threaten to turn into a serious political problem for the president.
Trump himself has warned that if the wrong leader is allowed to take office, the US will be forced back to war “in five years”.
Ending the operation may also require the consent of Israel — which has shown it is willing to act unilaterally and is committed to permanently eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat, with or without Washington’s help.
