SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
defense priorities
'He Has No Choice. He Lost': Expert Delivers Brutal Obituary for Trump's Failed Iran War
"This is a devastating defeat for the United States," said University of Chicago political scientist John Mearsheimer.
Aug 10, 2026
University of Chicago political scientist John Mearsheimer on Sunday delivered a harsh reality check to US President Donald Trump over the state of his illegal war with Iran.
In an interview with Australian journalist Tom Switzer, Mearsheimer was asked why Trump seemed willing to accept an arrangement in which Iran is able to demand fees from transport ships in exchange for reopening the Strait of Hormuz, which has been almost entirely shut down since the US and Israel began bombing Iran in late February.
"It's very simple... he has no choice," Mearsheimer replied. "He lost the war. This is a devastating defeat for the United States. Can you tell me what the United States should do to regain leverage over Iran? I actually think you can't tell me because we have no solution."
Host: But John, again, why would Trump accept an arrangement in the Strait of Hormuz where Iran receives fees & denies passage to anyone transiting without its permission?
John Mearsheimer: It’s very simple. He has no choice. He lost the war. This is a devastating defeat for the… pic.twitter.com/RQ9G5fKiDA
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) August 10, 2026
Mearsheimer then explained why Trump's threats to escalate his assault on Iran ring completely hollow.
"One, he's out of munitions," the political scientist said. "Number two, our Gulf allies have told him, in no uncertain terms, that is unacceptable because the Iranians have made it clear that if we escalate, they will escalate, and they will destroy oil facilities, desalination plants, and so forth."
In the same discussion, Vali Nasr, professor of international affairs at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, similarly argued that Iran appears to be in the driver's seat, noting that "the period where you can basically pressure Iran into submission... I think is gone."
Nasr added that Iran now appears to be "very comfortable demanding" concessions from the US in exchange for reopening the strait, and he said that many in the Washington foreign policy establishment had yet to understand this fact.
"In reality, Iran is not overplaying its hand," he said. "It's just playing its hand."
Johns Hopkins scholar Vali Nasr tells host Tom Switzer that Washington’s fixation on Tehran “overplaying its hand” reflects disbelief at how dramatically the balance of power has shifted.
“Iran is not overplaying. It’s just playing its hand,” he said.
Iran sees a narrow window… pic.twitter.com/7sL9ryc5Jw
— Drop Site (@DropSiteNews) August 10, 2026
The scholars' arguments were echoed by Daniel DePetris, fellow at Defense Priorities, who wrote in an analysis published Monday that the US has little choice but to accept Iran charging fees to ships in exchange for passage through the strait.
While acknowledging such a situation is far from ideal, DePetris said that it became inevitable when Trump launched his unprovoked war without authorization from the US Congress more than five months ago.
"Trump’s war handed Iran the perfect excuse to leverage its geography, and the Iranians didn’t hesitate to do so," wrote DePetris. "Over time, the Strait of Hormuz, in addition to Iran’s more aggressive posture toward its neighbors writ-large, has become something far more valuable: a strategic card Iran can play whenever Trump threatens to accelerate military operations."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Nonproliferation Experts Say Congress Must Reject Trump-Saudi Nuclear Deal
One expert described the reported deal as "tantamount to the United States giving up on nonproliferation."
Jul 22, 2026
Nonproliferation experts are raising alarms after Reuters reported on Tuesday that President Donald Trump's administration plans to ask Congress to approve a deal that could allow Saudi Arabia to develop nuclear weapons.
According to Reuters, an agreement crafted by the Trump administration would allow the US to share nuclear power technology with the Saudis without proper safeguards that "would stop materials being used in nuclear weapons programs."
Specifically, Reuters' sources said the deal "does not include the 'Gold Standard' that would block the kingdom from enriching uranium and reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, both of which are potential pathways to nuclear weapons."
Kelsey Davenport, director for nonprolifertion policy at the Arms Control Association, warned in a Tuesday social media post that the reported agreement "sets a terrible precedent" because it "goes against long-standing bipartisan support for negotiating nuclear cooperation agreements that prohibit enrichment and reprocessing."
"If the deal is inadequate, which it seems to be," Davenport added, "Congress should vote to disapprove it."
Andrea Stricker, deputy director and research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies' Nonproliferation Program, said that "Congress should block" the deal, which she warned could lead other states in the region to seek their own nuclear weapons.
If Congress fails to block the deal, Stricker added, then "one hopes the policy will be reversed by a subsequent administration before too much damage is done in terms of watering down safeguards, setting negative precedents for other states, and failing to contain the spread of enrichment and reprocessing."
James Acton, co-director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace's Nuclear Policy Program, said the reported Saudi nuclear deal is "tantamount to the United States giving up on nonproliferation."
"Saudi officials are open about a potential interest in nuclear weapons," Acton said. "The United States should do nothing to facilitate enrichment or reprocessing in the Kingdom."
Emma Ashford, senior fellow at the Stimson Center, agreed that the reported agreement would mean the end of US attempts to curtail the spread of nuclear weapons, and noted the irony of the Trump administration "bombing Iran to prevent them ever having enrichment, while giving it to the Saudis."
Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East Program at Defense Priorities, called the reported deal a "terrible idea" that "goes against decades of US policy to give enrichment technology to a country that doesn't already possess it."
Kelanic also warned that the agreement would empower the Saudi government in ways that could come back to bite the US.
"Aside from the proliferation risks, uranium enrichment would give Saudi Arabia a potent source of leverage to extract future concessions from Washington," Kelanic explained, "including new security guarantees, by threatening to weaponize its program unless the United States promises enhanced military protection. That has happened before, for instance in South Korea and West Germany, where the U.S. traded protection to persuade partners to abandon nuclear programs."
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), ranking member of the House Foreign Relations Committee, expressed "deep concerns" about the reported deal, which he said "would significantly erode existing nonproliferation standards."
"Any agreement must include appropriate limits on enrichment and reprocessing," Meeks emphasized, "as well as the [International Atomic Energy Agency's] Additional Protocol."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Scholar Says Trump Disaster in Iran Helps Prove That Era of 'American Empire Is Over'
Jennifer Kavanagh, senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, said US military retrenchment is needed on a global scale.
Jun 08, 2026
President Donald Trump's illegal war with Iran has gone so poorly that it portends the end of the American-led global order, foreign policy scholar Jennifer Kavanagh wrote in an analysis published Monday by The American Conservative.
Despite Trump's repeated declarations of a total US victory over Iran, Kavanagh wrote that the continued closure of the Strait of Hormuz has revealed the limits of the American military, which in 2025 had a budget of nearly $1 trillion.
Kavanagh, senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, argued that the Iran war has been particularly damaging to US power because it has drained US munitions supplies and has still achieved none of the major objectives Trump outlined at the start of the conflict.
"Some estimates suggest the United States has burned through 1,000 Tomahawk missiles, nearly 50% of its Patriot and THAAD stockpiles, and significant portions of advanced stand-off weapons like PRSM and JASSM missiles," Kavanagh wrote. "The constraints on US military power created by these shortages will be consequential and enduring."
In practical terms, Kavanagh said, this means the US simply cannot meet key commitments for the foreseeable future, such as supporting the defense of Taiwan in the case of an attack by China.
Kavanagh emphasized that American policymakers should reduce US military commitments around the world and not cling to a global order that is no longer sustainable.
"The period of US military dominance—and of American empire—is over," Kavanagh wrote. "The resulting future will be less comfortable for the United States, but its changes are overdue and its challenges manageable. With the right moves today, American retrenchment can leave the United States, and the world, better off."
This retrenchment, wrote Kavanagh, would refocus American defense strategy solely on defending US territory and "ensuring access to key economic markets." In practice, this would mean closing military bases and ending deployments in Europe and the Middle East, a "narrowing" of security guarantees to NATO allies, and explicitly stating that it would not defend Taiwan in the face of an attack from China, which Kavanagh said would "reduce the risk of a war with China that at this point the United States is unprepared to fight."
"These changes in posture and alliance commitments would amount to a massive transformation of American foreign policy," Kavanagh acknowledged, "but the result would be a sustainable military position, consistent with US capabilities and resources and tailored to protecting US interests."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy