Memo To Trump: The Quickest Way To End The Iran War Is To Resume Hostilities

Key Concepts

• Regime Change: The strategic objective of removing the current Iranian leadership.
• Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC): The primary military and security apparatus of the Iranian regime.
• Hostilities Resumption: The argument that military pressure must be sustained to achieve victory.
• Strategic Credibility: The necessity of proving to internal Iranian opposition that the U.S. will not abandon them.
• Economic Blockade: The use of financial sanctions and asset seizures to weaken the regime.

---

The Case for Resuming Hostilities

Steve Forbes argues that the current approach to the conflict with Iran is fundamentally flawed. He posits that the Iranian leadership is composed of "fanatics" who do not operate under rational geopolitical frameworks. Consequently, he asserts that the quickest way to end the war is not through diplomacy, but through the immediate resumption of military operations.

The Failure of Premature Ceasefires

Forbes identifies the recent ceasefire as a "huge error," arguing that it provided the Iranian regime with a strategic reprieve.

• Missed Objectives: He claims that the U.S. and Israel required an additional two weeks of military operations to neutralize all intended targets.
• Perception of Weakness: By calling for a deal, the U.S. has signaled to both allies and adversaries that it is driven by domestic political pressure and global economic concerns, specifically the spike in oil prices and food supply chain disruptions caused by fertilizer shortages.
• The "Wait-Out" Strategy: The cessation of hostilities has emboldened the "mullahs," leading them to believe they can survive the conflict by simply waiting for international pressure to force a permanent end to the fighting.

Proposed Strategic Framework

To effectively dismantle the regime, Forbes outlines a four-pronged approach:

1. Cessation of Diplomacy: An immediate halt to all negotiations, whether direct or indirect, with the current Iranian government.
2. Economic Warfare: Tightening the blockade and publicly seizing the bank accounts of Iranian officials, with a specific focus on the IRGC.
3. Military Completion: Resuming bombing campaigns to destroy the remaining intended targets that were spared by the premature ceasefire.
4. Empowering Internal Opposition: Creating the conditions for disaffected elements within the Iranian army to stage a coup or transition of power.

The Problem of Credibility and Historical Precedent

A central argument in the commentary is that the Iranian military will only act against the regime if they are certain the U.S. will not abandon them. Forbes cites historical failures to support this:

• 2009 Uprising: The U.S. refusal to back the major uprising in 2009, coupled with the Obama administration's desire to negotiate with the regime, damaged U.S. credibility.
• Recent Rhetoric: Forbes notes that while the U.S. recently encouraged Iranians to protest, the lack of immediate follow-up military action against the regime left those protesters vulnerable to retaliation.

Conclusion and Takeaways

Forbes concludes that the survival of the current Iranian regime is an unacceptable outcome, as they will inevitably return to their "evil ways" regardless of any signed agreements. The primary takeaway is that the U.S. must make it "crystal clear" that the regime is being dismantled. Only by demonstrating unwavering commitment to the elimination of the IRGC and the security forces can the U.S. provide the necessary assurance for internal Iranian military factions to take the final steps toward regime change.

As Forbes states: "A new government will take over only if regime opponents in the armed forces are confident we won't betray them. Only then will they take the necessary action."