Iran war a huge U.S. victory

OPINION:

Operation Epic Fury represents a decisive, courageous move by President Trump to prevent Iran from ever developing a nuclear weapon and to decisively confront an adversary that has waged proxy war and terrorism against America for nearly five decades.

Given the operation’s remarkable success, the U.S. should soon end military operations against Iran and declare victory.

What it shouldn’t do is escalate the war or send troops into Iran.

Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure has been destroyed. The “missile shield” it was amassing to prevent attacks against its nuclear weapons development has been eliminated. Its navy has been sunk.

U.S. and Israeli airstrikes against more than 6,000 targets — including military installations, nuclear-related facilities, ballistic missile sites, air bases, command centers and internal security bases — have devastated Iran’s power projection capability and instruments of state repression.

The killing of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and thousands of other political and military leaders has wreaked havoc on Iran’s leadership and command structure.

These achievements far exceed expectations for Operation Epic Fury and represent as much as the U.S. and Israel could hope to accomplish with an air campaign.

The U.S. never intended to topple Iran’s repressive, radical Islamist regime through airstrikes alone. By severely degrading the regime’s internal security apparatus and overall capabilities, Operation Epic Fury has created an opportunity for the Iranian people to rise up and take back their country.

Advertisement Advertisement

Now is the time for the U.S. to conclude the military campaign and shift to a new strategy focused on bolstering the Iranian people’s fight for liberty. This should include supporting internal defections, transitional planning, enhancing access to information and the internet, engaging and empowering the Iranian diaspora and opposition, and other steps.

Some have suggested escalating the conflict by deploying U.S. ground troops into Iran. Such proposals represent poor strategic choices that could trap America in a prolonged, costly quagmire and expose U.S. service members to unacceptable risks.

Additional airstrikes will be required in the next two weeks or so to neutralize ongoing missile and drone threats to commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz. Should Iran persist in attacking ships in the strait, the U.S. has options to halt these attacks, including a naval blockade of Iranian ports.

President Trump has shown prudent leadership by urging oil-dependent nations in the region to contribute warships to escort tankers through the strait and by pressing Tehran to halt threats to Persian Gulf shipping.

Beyond safeguarding freedom of navigation in the strait, the U.S. must begin drawing down the bulk of its forces deployed to the region as part of the operation. A residual naval presence should remain in the Arabian Sea to monitor compliance and deter any resumption of hostilities.

Advertisement Advertisement

In recent days, there have also been suggestions to deploy U.S. Marines to capture Iran’s Kharg Island oil export facilities and terminals, or secure coastal zones near the Strait of Hormuz. Others have advocated sending special operations teams to locate and retrieve any surviving near-weapons-grade enriched uranium from damaged nuclear sites.

Yet placing U.S. Marines on Kharg Island or in the vicinity of the strait would expose them to severe risks from Iranian drones, missiles, naval mines, land-based explosives and direct engagements with regular army units and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

Such operations would achieve little in persuading Iran’s battered yet defiant leadership to end attacks on shipping, capitulate or negotiate a ceasefire.

Sending U.S. Special Forces to dig through the rubble of bombed nuclear sites in search of surviving near-weapons-grade enriched uranium is an even worse idea. Any remaining nuclear material has almost certainly been destroyed, dispersed beyond recovery or buried under tons of rubble.

Advertisement Advertisement

Even in the unlikely event that Iran could later salvage some of it, the country no longer possesses the infrastructure or expertise required to weaponize the material. Endangering American lives in pursuit of such a high-risk, low-reward and ultimately unnecessary objective is neither justified nor defensible.

Operation Epic Fury was a courageous choice by Mr. Trump, who decisively confronted the Iranian threat in a way that previous administrations had avoided. Unlike past presidents, he refused to kick this problem to the next president, appease Iran or downplay its pursuit of nuclear weapons.

Mr. Trump also wisely avoided a full-scale ground invasion of Iran, committing U.S. troops to direct regime change or nation-building efforts. Instead, through targeted, overwhelming strikes, he created a pathway for the Iranian people to take control of their future.

Although some remaining challenges persist, especially the need to ensure the security of the Strait of Hormuz, they are manageable. With the objectives of Operation Epic Fury now achieved, the focus must now shift to a new phase: providing sustained, nonmilitary support for the Iranian people’s pursuit of freedom while maintaining vigilant monitoring through residual U.S. forces in the region.

Advertisement Advertisement

Operation Epic Fury stands as a historic victory for America, dramatically diminishing the long-standing threat from the Iranian regime. Mr. Trump can and should proudly declare victory and claim this major win for the United States.

• Fred Fleitz previously served as National Security Council chief of staff, a CIA analyst and a staff member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. He is the vice chair of the America First Policy Institute’s Center for American Security. He is the author of “North Korea, Nuclear Brinkmanship, and the Oval Office,” to be released by Texas A&M Press on April 7.