In Focus delivers deeper coverage of the political, cultural, and ideological issues shaping America. Published daily by senior writers and experts, these in-depth pieces go beyond the headlines to give readers the full picture. You can find our full list of In Focus pieces here.
President Donald Trump’s decision to launch Operation Epic Fury against Iran has been met with criticism from some conservative commentators and members of Congress. However, if one looks beyond overly simplistic analogies and short-term considerations, it is clear that the operation in Iran is, in many ways, the epitome of Trump’s “peace through strength” approach.
From a strategic perspective, the decision to launch the operation was not only correct but historically important for America’s vital national security interests and global positioning.
Trump has rightly been applauded for closing the gap between rhetoric and action demonstrated by numerous previous administrations. However, there was another head of state who also aligned rhetoric and action: Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. As he and his regime chanted “Death to America,” they also repeatedly carried out murderous terrorist attacks against Americans, leading to the deaths of more than 1,000 American citizens.
Further, many failed to realize the severe threat posed by the rapid buildup of Iran’s ballistic missile and drone capabilities. It is estimated that Iran possessed some 2,500 ballistic missiles on the eve of Operation Epic Fury. According to Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Iran was producing over 100 additional missiles a month.
The threat posed by Iran’s ballistic missiles is not theoretical. They’ve accounted for the deaths of dozens of Israeli civilians, despite Israel’s world-leading air defense systems. Thousands of these missiles, if launched at American bases across the Middle East and Europe — and in the near future, potentially at the American homeland — would have posed a grave threat.
Iran’s leaders made absolutely clear that they were not willing to even discuss the Islamic Republic’s missile program with American negotiators. As the head of Iran’s Defense Council, Ali Shamkhani, declared on Feb. 11, “The missile capabilities of the Islamic Republic of Iran are non-negotiable.” In the face of this threat, which Iran sought to combine with the nuclear weapons program it was working to rebuild, American action became necessary.
Trump’s “peace through strength” strategy prefers diplomacy over military action. At the same time, under Trump, the U.S. is not willing to wait until an avowed enemy has actually killed Americans or has developed capabilities that pose a severe threat before taking action. After multiple rounds of good-faith negotiations, it became clear that there was no diplomatic solution to Iran’s ballistic missile threat, nor was Iran willing to meet America’s minimum red lines for verifiably and permanently ending its military nuclear drive.
When diplomacy failed, military action became necessary. Unlike previous administrations, the Trump administration would not be drawn into endless talks with a radical regime that had perfected the art of dragging out negotiations while advancing its military and terrorist programs.
Beyond the impact of eliminating Iran’s ballistic missile program, as well as the threats posed by its navy and its continued nuclear drive, Operation Epic Fury serves America’s long-term interests from a global perspective.
Iran has long prevented a true pivot of American military attention from the Middle East to the Indo-Pacific. Without Iran, Hamas could not have successfully launched its Oct. 7, 2023, massacre, which led to the region-wide seven-front war that demanded extensive American involvement. Without Iranian military assistance, Russia would be in a significantly weaker position in Ukraine, making a negotiated settlement more likely.
Iran’s proxies have launched thousands of attacks against U.S. regional allies, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Israel, and the Islamic Republic has been involved in destabilization efforts in Bahrain, Jordan, Lebanon, and additional Middle Eastern countries.
Without Iran’s destabilizing activities and threats, the United States would be freer to turn far more of its attention and assets toward China. Indeed, it is likely that for precisely this reason, China has developed such a close strategic alliance with Iran to tie up the U.S. in dealing with the threats posed by Iran and its proxies.
While Trump and Rubio have made clear that regime change is not the goal of the operation, they have also been equally clear that such an outcome, if led by the Iranian people, would be highly desirable. As Trump stated on March 1, “I call upon all Iranian patriots who yearn for freedom to seize this moment. … I made a promise to you, and I fulfilled that promise. The rest will be up to you.”
A moderate and peaceful regime in Iran would not only be an excellent economic and energy partner but would also allow a drawdown of American military assets in the region. But even absent a regime transformation, the elimination or extensive degradation of Iran’s ballistic, naval, nuclear, and terrorism capabilities would allow a refocus of attention and resources toward China.
A perhaps not fully foreseen consequence of Operation Epic Fury is that it may advance the long-envisioned Middle East Strategic Alliance between American allies in the region. Iran’s repeated attacks against the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman, Jordan, Israel, and other nations have increased military coordination among these countries, and between them and the U.S., as never before. One of the goals of the Abraham Accords, as well as the transfer of Israel to CENTCOM’s area of responsibility, was to empower America’s regional partners to work together to secure the region from common enemies. A consequence of the current operation in Iran may well be far more robust military cooperation among CENTCOM members in the future, as well as increased regional expenditures on military development and capabilities. This, too, would allow the U.S. to pivot resources and attention to other arenas.
Those who believe that the decision to launch Operation Epic Fury was not just correct but historically important must not ignore the questions raised by America’s past military operations in the region, particularly in Iraq. However, it would be inaccurate to assume that the two situations are analogous. Lessons must be learned, but comparisons must not be overly simplistic.
In light of the lessons of Iraq, Trump has offered full immunity to the Iranian regime’s forces. It appears unlikely that there will be any substantial deployment of American ground troops. Trump has also made clear that the responsibility for any regime change rests on the Iranian people.
However, the differences from Iraq should also be clear. Large segments of the Iranian people have already demonstrated — in fact, risked their lives and paid a horrific price — to demand a democratic future for their country. Iran is the home of a long and proud heritage, and of millions of citizens who wish to shape a better future for their country, not tear it apart in sectarian infighting or jihadist holy wars.
Operation Epic Fury is “peace through strength” in action. America’s service members, as well as those of Israel, have demonstrated incredible capabilities that have already led to unprecedented operational achievements.
TRUMP, FOREVER WARS, AND IRAQ SYNDROME
If the U.S. remains focused on the declared objectives of the war and implements the lessons of the past, this operation will advance America’s most vital national security interests at home, in the Middle East, in the Indo-Pacific, and around the world.
Asher Fredman is a Visiting Fellow in the Allison Center for National Security at The Heritage Foundation. He can be followed on X at @fredman_a.
