Source: Marine CorpsWith U.S. and Israeli operations expanding in scale, the war in Iran is testing the limits of tactical military success. The ongoing campaign has severely degraded Iranian capabilities, but it has also triggered a growingly complex web of global economic and strategic consequences. Here’s where things stand.
Recent Military Action and High-Profile Targets
U.S. and Israeli strikes continue to degrade Iranian military capabilities and eliminate senior leadership. A U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) factsheet posted Wednesday indicated that more than 7,800 targets had been struck and that more than 120 Iranian warships were damaged or destroyed since the war began.
Last weekend, the U.S. announced strikes against targets on Kharg Island, which is responsible for most of Iran’s oil exports. The strikes specifically targeted military assets on the island, including missile and mine storage facilities that could be used in the Strait of Hormuz, while leaving the oil infrastructure on the island untouched. However, other segments of Iran’s oil and energy infrastructure were targeted in separate strikes, and Tehran has retaliated with sustained attacks against oil facilities in Gulf countries, placing continued pressure on oil prices. Iran has also launched several cyberattacks, warning that major U.S. tech firms could be targeted. Disruption from cyberattacks is a serious threat, with potential targets including government networks, defense contractors and other civilian companies, and utilities, among others.
The targeting of senior Iranian officials also continued in force this week, further eroding the regime’s leadership. On Tuesday, Israel’s defense minister announced the deaths of Iran’s top security official, Ali Larijani, and the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Basij militia, Gen. Gholam Reza Soleimani, in overnight strikes. Larijani is a particularly significant loss for Iran, as he was largely believed to be spearheading military operations since the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Iran’s intelligence minister, Esmail Khatib, was also killed on Wednesday, according to Israel. U.S. Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, said during a Wednesday Senate hearing that the Iranian regime “appears to be intact but largely degraded.”
A contingent of Marines is also on the way to the region. Satellite images have shown USS Tripoli (LHA 7), an America class amphibious assault ship, along with two escorts, traveling towards the Middle East. Tripoli is an aviation-focused warship that can carry F-35B fighters, MV-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft, MH-60S helicopters, and around 2,200 Marines. The administration hasn’t signaled how it plans to deploy the Marines. Seizing Kharg Island is one plausible mission for the Marines, albeit a risky one.
As of Monday, the Pentagon said that approximately 200 U.S. service members have been wounded since the start of the war, and 13 have been killed, including the crew of a KC-135 tanker that crashed over western Iraq.
The Standoff in the Strait of Hormuz
One of the biggest strategic challenges for Washington is Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which is a critical shipping lane used to transport roughly one-fifth of the world’s crude oil. Iranian missiles are currently the biggest threat facing ships there, and while much of Iran’s minelaying capacity has been wiped out, mines remain a potential concern. Iran can also employ small fast attack craft and unmanned surface vessels to target ships trying to navigate the strait, and the venerable A-10 Warthog has begun flying missions in Operation Epic Fury to target some of those threats.
Washington’s approach to the closure has been inconsistent, suggesting a lack of strategy on how to reopen the strait. President Trump initially suggested that U.S. Navy ships could be used to escort commercial ships, but he subsequently called on allies to assist in the mission, citing the global value of the pivotal waterway. The president ramped up pressure on foreign leaders, arguing that NATO would face a “very bad” future if they failed to help. Initially, European countries resisted Washington’s demands. “This is not our war; we did not start it,” said Germany’s defense minister, Boris Pistorius, who favored a diplomatic solution to the problem. Trump, frustrated with the initial response, stated forcefully in a Truth Social post that “we no longer ‘need,’ or desire, the NATO Countries’ assistance — WE NEVER DID!” However, the president subsequently shared an opinion piece arguing that U.S. allies should help open the strait. The back-and-forth highlighted deteriorating relationships between the U.S. and its NATO allies under the second Trump administration. Trump reportedly expected Iran to capitulate before blocking the strait, which explains the lack of a clear plan for the current situation.
Despite the tension, a group of seven U.S. allies issued a joint statement Thursday indicating a willingness to contribute to reopening the Strait of Hormuz. The statement was issued by the leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. The countries condemned Iran’s closure of the strait and highlighted the need for freedom of navigation. “We express our readiness to contribute to appropriate efforts to ensure safe passage through the Strait,” the statement said. “We welcome the commitment of nations who are engaging in preparatory planning.” The joint statement left the specifics of “appropriate efforts” deliberately vague.
Escorting ships through the strait is a dangerous endeavor. Any ship transiting the strait is a potential target for Iranian missiles, airborne and maritime drones, and mines, meaning both civilian vessels and warships run the risk of being damaged or suffering casualties. Escort missions also carry a financial burden. In addition to the costs of an increased operational tempo, warships could end up further depleting interceptor inventories, as the U.S. Navy experienced while defending ships in the Red Sea from Houthi rebels.
Regarding the mine threat, the U.S. recently retired its Bahrain-based Avenger class mine countermeasures ships, which featured wood and fiberglass hulls to facilitate demining operations. That job now falls to the Independence class Littoral Combat Ship, which is outfitted with mine countermeasures equipment, including towed sonar, unmanned surface and underwater vehicles, and an airborne mine neutralization system carried by an MH-60S helicopter. However, two of the Navy’s three LCS outfitted with minesweeping gear were spotted in Malaysia earlier this week, far from the war in Iran. Even if the ships return to the Middle East soon, conducting demining operations in the contested strait carries its own set of risks.
Oil Markets Under Pressure
Ongoing strikes against Iranian and regional oil infrastructure, combined with the lack of free navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, continue to disrupt energy markets. My colleague, Derek Bisaccio, recently addressed how rising energy prices are impacting Washington’s strategic approach to the war. He cited possible options like the U.S. releasing oil from the strategic reserves and even easing sanctions on Russian oil to help lower prices, even though doing so would give Moscow fresh resources to pour into its war in Ukraine. Both of those scenarios came to pass over the past week. Washington released 172 million barrels from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, which will increase supply but puts pressure on dwindling reserves that were also utilized following the start of the war in Ukraine. It will take years to replenish these withdrawals, making this a longer-term security concern.
The U.S. also followed through on temporarily lifting sanctions on Russian oil, but Washington didn’t stop there. The U.S. has also temporarily eased sanctions on Venezuelan oil, and on Thursday the administration announced it planned to remove sanctions even on Iranian oil, highlighting the tug-of-war between increasing economic pressure on Iran and concern about rising gas prices at home. Notably, the recent joint statement released by the group of seven U.S. allies applauded Washington’s release of oil from the strategic reserves and said the allies would “take other steps to stabilize energy markets.”
Timing and Additional Resources
We are now approaching the start of the fourth week of a war that the White House originally said would last up to four to five weeks. The U.S. maintains there are still thousands of targets to hit, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Thursday that the “largest strike package yet” is in the works. Every level of Iranian leadership also remains a target. Tehran has shown no signs of conceding, despite the level of destruction, making the timeline of the war unclear. If the regime survives, it could still rebuild its missile and drone stockpiles and pose a continued threat. At the start of the war, Trump called on Iranians to revolt against the regime, which is a difficult task for an unarmed populace that has already faced deadly government crackdowns against dissent. The president later conceded that point, saying an Iranian revolution is “a very big hurdle.” The Trump administration has said it has no plans to send ground troops into Iran, while also refusing to rule out the possibility. A major ground incursion to topple the regime would take a significant amount of time and resources to stage and carry out, and it appears unlikely at this time. However, a narrower operation, such as trying to take Kharg Island, could be on the table. While speculative, this type of move would be intended to increase pressure on the regime, but it could have untold consequences on Iran’s oil infrastructure, its civilian population, and global energy prices.
The financial cost is another issue for Washington, as well as Israel and Gulf nations. The Washington Post reported Wednesday that the White House would seek a $200 billion supplemental to help pay for the Iran war, an amount that far exceeds earlier rumors of a $50 billion war request. Hegseth indicated the $200 billion number isn’t final and could be adjusted. It’s possible the supplemental could include items beyond the immediate cost of the war, but passage through Congress is far from guaranteed. The supplemental comes at a time when Trump has promised a $1.5 trillion defense budget, which would represent an increase of more than 50 percent above FY26 spending levels.
Taken together, the past week’s developments highlight a conflict that is tactically successful in degrading Iranian capabilities but strategically uncertain, with no clear off-ramp and mounting risks for both regional stability and U.S. interests.
Shaun's deep-rooted interest in military equipment continues in his role as a senior defense analyst with a focus on the United States. He played an integral role in the development of Forecast International's U.S. Defense Budget Forecast, an interactive online product that tracks Pentagon acquisition programs throughout the congressional budget process. As editor of International Military Markets – North America, Shaun has cultivated a deep understanding of the vast defense markets in the United States and Canada. He is a regular contributor to Forecast International's Defense & Security Monitor blog and has co-authored white papers on global defense spending and various military programs.
image sources
- USS Tripoli and Marine Aircraft Group 13 demonstrate Lightning Carrier Concept: Marine Corps
