President Trump seemingly has no good options to end the unpopular and expensive Iran war.
But one idea is gaining traction on Capitol Hill and in national security circles: Simply declare victory and stop fighting.
Key Republican lawmakers and foreign policy analysts say the notion deserves serious consideration, given the devastation the American campaign has already inflicted on Iran’s military leadership, its navy and its missile-and-drone production capacity.
Other U.S. objectives — opening the Strait of Hormuz, completely destroying Tehran’s nuclear program and stopping its support for terrorist proxy groups — aren’t fully accomplished. But the war’s skyrocketing cost and the persistent danger to American troops, coupled with high domestic gas prices and widening threats to energy infrastructure across the Middle East, could all lead to a political determination that now is the time to call off the conflict and declare America victorious.
“I think it’s a legitimate option. And you have to look at it from the perspective of taking all the emotion out of it and saying, what would this actually accomplish?” said Rep. Pat Harrigan, North Carolina Republican and a combat-decorated Green Beret.
Mr. Harrigan recently told The Washington Times’ “Threat Status” podcast in an exclusive interview that it’s an idea “I don’t personally love, but you have to consider it.”
“You can logically make an argument and follow what Ronald Reagan did in 1984, following the Beirut, Lebanon, bombing, where we lost 241 American service members, where they just concluded we’re going to continue having problems in this region as long as we are there,” he said.
So far, at least 18 U.S. troops have died in the Iran war. Hundreds more have been wounded. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told Congress last week the conflict has cost American taxpayers $37.5 billion, though many outside observers and analysts believe the true price tag is much higher.
The U.S. military and its allies are rapidly depleting stockpiles of missile interceptors and munitions, and the American defense industrial base appears unable to replenish the supplies quickly.
U.S. gas prices and global energy markets have been upended by Iran’s grip over the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz. New nations are being drawn into the fray, evidenced by joint U.S.-Saudi Arabian strikes on locations in Iraq this week that the Pentagon said were used by Iran-backed militias to launch drone attacks across the theater.
Strategically, the conflict also seems to be driving America’s adversaries closer together. Mr. Hegseth told the Senate Armed Services Committee recently that both China and Russia “are, at different levels, enabling some of the things Iran is doing.”
Just this week, the Ukrainian military struck an Iranian-flagged cargo ship that Kyiv says was moving weapons components from Russia to Iran. That incident underscored the growing convergence between the U.S.-Iran conflict and the Russia-Ukraine war.
For his part, Mr. Trump seems compelled to keep up the military pressure on Iran, especially after Tehran attempted a surprise missile attack against U.S. forces this week. U.S. Central Command, which oversees American military operations in the Mideast, said that attack was thwarted.
Mr. Trump vowed revenge.
“We’re going to beat the f——— s—- out of them,” he told Fox News’ Trey Yingst on Wednesday. “We’ll be hitting them hard. They’re going to get a beating.”
The case for declaring victory
Specialists say Mr. Trump could choose a different path.
While it may seem like America’s global standing would take a hit if Iran’s regime survives a showdown with the U.S., some analysts say that’s not the case, and that ending the fighting now may offer benefits.
“I think it would be OK in terms of effects on credibility — though not necessarily our good judgment in starting the war in the first place,” said Michael O’Hanlon, senior fellow and director of research in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution
“But there still need to be some long-term constraints and monitoring on Iran’s nuclear activities and a reopening of the Strait [of Hormuz], or construction of more bypassing pipelines” to move fuel across the Middle East, Mr. O’Hanlon told The Times.
Should he declare victory, Mr. Trump would need to explain how the U.S. would constrain Iran’s nuclear program, stop its military from rebuilding its navy or ballistic missile and drone production facilities, and ensure that the Strait of Hormuz is open to commercial ship traffic.
Those are tall orders. But the U.S. has racked up significant wins so far in the conflict. Those wins could support an argument that America has won the war.
In May, CENTCOM Commander Adm. Brad Cooper told Congress that the U.S. has damaged or destroyed over 85% of Iran’s ballistic missile, drone and naval defense industrial base. Most of its ships — other than the small speedboats used to harass tankers in the Persian Gulf — have been sunk. Key nuclear facilities have been destroyed during this campaign and during June 2025’s Operation Midnight Hammer.
Scores of Iranian military leaders have been killed. Iran is more regionally isolated than ever before.
Mr. Harrigan said all those facts could be used to argue that now is the moment for deliberate de-escalation by the U.S.
“What would that de-escalation do right now? Well, it would certainly relieve pressure on global energy markets,” he told the Threat Status Podcast. “It would relieve pressure on our regional allies that are being harassed by Iran. It would take this out of the forefront of the media for the November election. And, it would keep our troops out of harm’s way in the short term. … Those are all significant positive impacts.”
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.