In a speech delivered on the first night of the conflict on February 28, Trump urged the Iranian population to take over their government. However, subsequent months saw the administration pivot toward secondary wartime objectives, including neutralizing nuclear and missile threats and reopening the Strait of Hormuz, as analyzed by JINSA.
Assessing the Failed Oil Embargo and Expired MOU
The strategic shift back to regime collapse follows several unsuccessful diplomatic and economic maneuvers. In April, the administration initiated a blockade on Iranian oil exports designed to force Tehran into concessions. According to JINSA’s analysis, this blockade was overhyped and failed to cause an Iranian oil industry implosion or yield concessions regarding the nuclear program and the Strait of Hormuz.
Similarly, a memorandum of understanding signed on June 17 provided Tehran with $6.5 billion in oil revenue and promised billions more. Rather than compelling Iran to open the Strait of Hormuz, the windfall emboldened the regime to escalate attacks and increase demands. Consequently, Trump declared the memorandum dead on July 8, according to JINSA reports.
Did you know? During a 13-day stretch in July, the U.S. military targeted Iran’s coastal radars, along with its missile and drone capabilities, which ultimately achieved more progress in reopening the Strait of Hormuz than previous diplomatic efforts.
Economic Sanctions and the Limits of Tit-for-Tat Strikes
The administration recently introduced fresh financial measures under Operation Economic Outcast to increase pressure on Tehran. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated during the announcement that Iran faces a clear choice between complete global isolation and a path back to normalcy. Yet, JINSA notes that pursuing normalcy with the Iranian regime keeps the administration stuck in a cyclical pattern of limited force and unyielding retaliation.
While U.S. naval enforcement and strikes protect non-Iranian tankers passing through the Strait of Hormuz, these operations remain largely reactive. JINSA points out that retaliatory strikes have failed to deter Iranian aggression against U.S. bases stationed in neighboring Arab countries. Conversely, Israel has faced virtually no attacks on its territory or against forces stationed there for a few months, a restraint JINSA attributes to Tehran’s fear of a forceful Israeli response.
A Strategic Pivot Toward Regime Collapse
Achieving a sustainable resolution requires abandoning the pursuit of a new deal with Tehran. According to JINSA, the U.S. and Israel should execute devastating military strikes against domestic energy infrastructure—such as refineries and natural gas facilities generating electricity—alongside remaining missile and drone sites. Furthermore, these operations must neutralize nuclear targets like Pickaxe Mountain, matching prior commitments made by Trump.
While such decisive actions will inevitably trigger retaliatory responses and a temporary spike in oil prices, maintaining strict economic pressure and covertly supplying the Iranian population with communication tools, weapons, and planning resources will accelerate internal pressures on the regime.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the primary objective when the conflict with Iran began?
According to JINSA, President Trump initially stated the objective was creating conditions for eventual regime collapse by the Iranian people, telling them on February 28 to take over their government.
Why did the June 17 memorandum of understanding fail?
The MOU enabled Tehran to collect $6.5 billion in oil revenue within weeks and promised billions more, which emboldened the regime to increase attacks and ratchet up demands rather than open the Strait of Hormuz, prompting Trump to declare it dead on July 8.
How did the U.S. military successfully reopen the Strait of Hormuz?
For 13 straight nights in July, the U.S. military struck Iranian coastal radars, missiles, and drones, degrading Iran’s detection and attack capabilities so non-Iranian oil could safely transit the area, according to JINSA.
What military targets are recommended for future operations?
JINSA recommends targeting domestic energy infrastructure like refineries and natural gas facilities, remaining missile and drone sites, and nuclear locations including Pickaxe Mountain.
To read the complete analysis and explore further insights on regional security developments, access the original JINSA Insight reports.
Related reading