US Military Planners Prepare Options as Iran Nuclear Negotiations Hang in Balance

If diplomatic negotiations with Iran collapse, the United States is poised to launch a phased military campaign designed to systematically degrade Tehran’s military capabilities, according to defense analysts and former military planners.

While negotiators continue working toward what officials describe as a preliminary framework agreement centered on Iran’s nuclear program and potential sanctions relief, deep mistrust between Washington and Tehran has created a fragile diplomatic environment with high stakes.

“We’re not starting at zero,” said retired Army Lt. Col. Seth Krummrich, a former Joint Staff planner and current global risk analyst. “We’re both starting at minus 1,000 because neither side trusts each other at all. This is going to be a pretty hard process going forward.”

The tension was highlighted Thursday when a senior U.S. official confirmed American forces struck Iran’s Qeshm port and Bandar Abbas near the Strait of Hormuz. The operation came in response to Iran launching 15 ballistic and cruise missiles at the UAE’s Fujairah Port two days earlier.

Despite these strikes, U.S. officials insist they do not mark a resumption of broader hostilities or the end of the current ceasefire. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine described Iran’s earlier missile attack as a low-level strike that did not break the ceasefire agreement.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly warned that if negotiations fail, the U.S. is prepared to resume bombing Iran, potentially targeting energy infrastructure and key economic assets. However, military analysts suggest any escalation would likely unfold in carefully calculated phases.

The initial phase would focus on dismantling Iran’s ability to project force across the region, targeting ballistic and cruise missile systems, air defense networks, naval assets, and command-and-control infrastructure. Only later might operations expand to more controversial targets, according to retired Air Force Lt. Gen. David Deptula.

“The capabilities that would come into focus are the ones Iran uses to generate coercive leverage: ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, air defense systems, maritime strike assets, command-and-control networks, IRGC infrastructure, proxy support channels, and nuclear-related facilities,” Deptula explained, referring to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps.

“The military objective would be less about punishment and more about denying Iran the tools it uses to escalate,” he added.

A likely early focus would be Iran’s substantial fleet of fast attack boats operating in the Strait of Hormuz – a critical component of Tehran’s strategy to threaten global shipping in one of the world’s most vital energy corridors.

RP Newman, a military and terrorism analyst and Marine Corps veteran, noted that previous U.S. strikes eliminated only a small fraction of this capability. “We’ve blown up six of them. They’ve got about 400 left,” he said.

Similarly, Newman estimates the U.S. has eliminated “less than one percent of IRGC troops,” leaving the vast majority of a force that “numbers between 150,000 and 190,000” intact and operational.

However, targeting the IRGC presents complex challenges beyond simply eliminating senior leadership. “They’re not just a group of leaders at the top that you can kill away,” Krummrich explained. “Over 47 years it’s percolated down to every level.”

Before expanding military operations, Washington may continue applying economic pressure through sanctions and maritime interdiction. Retired Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, suggested the U.S. should “squeeze them for at least another three to six weeks” before considering more aggressive escalation.

Despite these pressures, Iran has continued moving crude oil through covert shipping networks and ship-to-ship transfers, with tanker tracking data showing millions of barrels still reaching international markets. A CIA analysis found Iran may be able to withstand current economic pressures for another three to four months before facing more severe financial strain.

The most significant question remains how far a U.S. campaign might expand if initial pressure fails to force concessions from Tehran. Trump has indicated a willingness to target civilian infrastructure, warning before the ceasefire that the U.S. could “completely obliterate” Iran’s electric generating plants, oil infrastructure, and key export hubs such as Kharg Island.

Military experts caution that such extensive strikes on dual-use infrastructure would present significant legal and operational challenges, potentially creating long-term regional instability if they push Iran toward internal collapse.

“In the short term, it might help. But in the long term, we’re all going to have to deal with it,” Krummrich warned. “Once you pull that lever, you’re basically pushing Iran closer to the edge of the abyss.”