Trump keeps telling America he’s winning in Iran. He’s less clear in explaining how the war ends

As global markets tremble and domestic polls decline, President Donald Trump finds himself walking a precarious diplomatic tightrope twelve days into his military campaign against Iran. The Republican president’s messaging has vacillated dramatically, shifting from demands for “unconditional surrender” to suggestions that replacing one hardline ayatollah with another might suffice.

This inconsistency in rhetoric has intensified scrutiny of a conflict that has already sent ripples throughout the Middle East and triggered economic uncertainty worldwide. Neither the United States nor Iran appears willing to back down, leaving the conflict’s trajectory and potential resolution increasingly unpredictable.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth acknowledged on Tuesday that the war’s progression remains entirely at Trump’s discretion, stating it’s up to the president “whether it’s the beginning, the middle or the end” of the conflict. Meanwhile, Trump’s own characterizations have been equally fluid, describing the engagement as both a “short-term excursion” that could conclude soon and a conflict where “we haven’t won enough” – all within a single speech to House Republicans on Monday.

Critics have seized on these contradictions, with Senator Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) bluntly telling reporters, “They didn’t have a plan. They have no timeline. And because of that, they have no exit strategy.”

The shifting objectives and timelines have created confusion about the administration’s endgame. While Trump has called for Iran’s leaders to surrender unconditionally, he has simultaneously suggested that his military objectives have already been largely achieved, with U.S. forces reportedly decimating Iran’s navy and significantly degrading its missile and drone capabilities.

Yet despite these claimed military successes, the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz – through which approximately 20% of the world’s daily oil supply typically flows – remains effectively closed to commercial traffic. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard has vowed that “not a single liter of oil” will pass through until American bombing ceases.

Iranian officials continue to project defiance. Ali Larijani, Iran’s top national security official, responded to Trump’s threats to hit Iran “TWENTY TIMES HARDER” with an ominous warning: “The sacrificial nation of Iran doesn’t fear your empty threats. Even those bigger than you couldn’t eliminate Iran. Be careful not to get eliminated yourself.”

The president has struggled to articulate a coherent justification for the preemptive strike against Iran that aligns with his long-standing promises to keep America out of “forever wars.” Among various explanations offered, Trump cited having a “feeling” that Iran was preparing to attack the United States – a claim White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later described as being “based on fact.”

However, this assertion appears at odds with information provided to Congress. Pentagon officials have reportedly told congressional staffers in private briefings that U.S. intelligence did not indicate Iran was planning a preemptive strike against America. The conflict has already resulted in eight U.S. military deaths and approximately 140 injuries from Iranian retaliatory strikes across the region.

Recent polling indicates that Trump’s decision has failed to produce the patriotic unity that typically accompanies the onset of American military engagements. Surveys from Quinnipiac, Fox News, and CNN consistently show that about half of American voters believe the military action has made the United States “less safe,” while only about 30% feel it has enhanced national security. The CNN poll revealed that approximately 60% of Americans trust Trump “not much” or “not at all” to make sound decisions regarding the use of force in Iran.

International reactions have been measured. European allies are proceeding cautiously after Trump publicly criticized British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Spain’s Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez for what he perceived as insufficient support for his military campaign. Even German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who has broadly backed the U.S.-Israeli efforts against Iran, expressed concern on Tuesday, noting that “more questions arise with every day of war” and emphasizing that “Germany and Europe have no interest in an endless war.”

Controversy has also erupted over a bombing that struck a girls’ school in southern Iran during the conflict’s initial day, killing at least 165 people. Trump initially blamed Iranian forces for the tragedy, claiming their munitions are “very inaccurate.” However, when investigative group Bellingcat published verified video showing a U.S. Tomahawk cruise missile striking a Revolutionary Guard facility near the school, Trump’s response evolved, though he erroneously claimed that Tehran possesses Tomahawk missiles – a weapons system exclusively available to the U.S. and select allies.

This assertion drew sharp criticism from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York), who called it “beyond asinine,” adding, “He says whatever pops into his head no matter what the truth is.” Even Republican allies like Senator Kevin Cramer of North Dakota have gently urged the administration to clarify what happened at the school, saying the military must “do everything you can to eliminate those mistakes going forward.”

As the conflict enters its second week with no clear resolution in sight, the international community watches with growing concern as markets fluctuate and regional stability hangs in the balance.