The failure of the U.S.–Israeli coalition to achieve its main objectives—the overthrow of Iran’s political regime, the elimination of the country’s missile capabilities, and the destruction of its nuclear program—was the result of a strategic miscalculation that was not initially apparent to Trump. As a result, confidence in U.S. security guarantees has been undermined across various regions of the world.
An even more significant strategic failure on Washington’s part was its lack of preparedness for what had long been a widely discussed response from Tehran—the establishment of control over the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. decision to refrain from using force to reopen the strait dealt a blow to its long-standing claim of upholding freedom of navigation in the world’s oceans.
The United States remains a very powerful country, of course, but the crisis of its hegemony has reached a stage of strategic disarray. This reality will need to be considered in relations with Washington.
For a long time, when speaking of how European countries had, over the course of 75 years of U.S. hegemony, lost the ability to think and act strategically, it still assumed that such capabilities remained inherent to the hegemon—the United States of America. The U.S.-Israeli war in Iran calls this assumption into question.
Until now, Washington’s support for Israel has been driven primarily by its own global interests. In 2025, and especially in 2026, the United States ceded its role as the initiator of the joint attack on Iran to Tel Aviv. This is likely the first instance of “tailism” in the history of the U.S. superpower.
The failure of the U.S.-Israeli coalition to achieve its main objectives—the overthrow of Iran’s political regime, the elimination of the country’s missile capabilities, and the destruction of its nuclear program—was the result of a strategic miscalculation that was not initially apparent to Trump.
Miscalculations and mistakes, of course, do happen. However, the inability to anticipate (or the willingness to ignore?) the obvious consequences of Iranian strikes on military and economic targets in the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, which had relied on U.S. protection, is a different matter altogether. As a result, confidence in U.S. security guarantees has been undermined across various regions of the world.
An even more significant strategic failure on Washington’s part was its lack of preparedness for what had long been a widely discussed response from Tehran—the establishment of control over the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. decision to refrain from using force to reopen the strait dealt a blow to its long-standing claim of upholding freedom of navigation in the world’s oceans.
The surge in oil prices resulting from the closure of the Strait of Hormuz hit not only, and not so much, China (as Trump might have hoped) as U.S. allies and partners. It also affected U.S. citizens and, by extension, the president’s own party just months before the midterm elections. In such circumstances, Trump’s announcement of a naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, following the failure of the first round of negotiations, amounted to a case of complete strategic incoherence.
The purpose of this brief analysis is not to criticize Trump or his administration, but to substantiate the conclusion that Washington has lost its sense of strategic vision, goal-setting, and leadership. The United States remains a very powerful country, of course, but the crisis of its hegemony has reached a stage of strategic disarray. This reality will need to be considered in relations with Washington.
