Major American newspapers have highlighted the unexpected consequences of the war launched by the United States and Israel against Iran. What began as a rapid military strike quickly evolved into an open confrontation in which military calculations are now intertwined with global economic repercussions.
As the conflict enters its second week, it has become clear that the war has not unfolded according to the plans of any party. The scope of the confrontation has expanded to involve several countries, while energy prices have risen and fears have grown that the conflict could slide into a longer war that may reshape the balance of power in the region.
The Trump administration had initially wagered that the strike on Iran could either lead to the collapse of the regime or produce a scenario similar to Venezuela.
A report published by The Wall Street Journal examined the developments of the war, noting that both sides misjudged the reaction of the other. This miscalculation could lead to a conflict that continues to expand without any clear exit in sight.
Although the confrontation remains in its early stages, the report argues that both sides misread the other’s likely response, a factor that may contribute to prolonging the war.
On one hand, United States President Donald Trump believed the war would be quick and easy. On the other hand, Iran assumed that attacking Gulf states would raise the cost of the conflict for all parties and force the region to pressure Washington. Developments on the ground, however, suggest a different trajectory.
Washington’s Expectation of a Quick Victory
According to American officials, the Trump administration had expected that the strike targeting the leadership of the Iranian regime on 28 February, which resulted in the death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, would either cause the regime to collapse or create a Venezuela like scenario in which some officials would choose to cooperate with Washington. Neither scenario has materialised so far.
Mojtaba Khamenei, the son of the late Supreme Leader, assumed his father’s position and vowed revenge, while no internal rebellion capable of challenging the Iranian government has yet emerged.
The report noted that intensive air strikes have not prevented Iran from continuing to launch ballistic missiles and drones towards American bases in the Middle East and Israel, in addition to major cities in Gulf states.
Tehran has also moved to close the Strait of Hormuz, the maritime corridor through which nearly one fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas trade passes. According to The Wall Street Journal, this step has significantly increased the cost of the war for Washington and the global economy.
At the outset, the Trump administration had expected the war to remain relatively short. In the first days of the conflict, Trump suggested that military operations might last only four to five weeks.
A report published by The New York Times revealed that the war with Iran has not unfolded as decision makers in the United States anticipated. Its economic effects have already begun to appear within American society despite less than two weeks having passed since the conflict began.
The newspaper reported that the Trump administration initially believed the war would be relatively brief. However, subsequent statements have presented mixed signals.
Economic repercussions of the war have already become visible in Washington. According to the report, petrol prices have risen noticeably since the beginning of the military strikes, increasing by 17 percent. Experts also expect food prices to follow due to higher energy and transport costs.
The report cited Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, who stated that the war is already producing “serious economic repercussions”. If the conflict continues, consumers may reduce spending, while companies could freeze hiring or even lay off workers.
Experts also warned that rising energy prices could gradually drive food prices higher. Disruptions to navigation through the Strait of Hormuz may affect global fertiliser supplies, which could later influence agricultural production and food costs.
The newspaper concluded that the war, once expected to be quick and limited, is now turning into a broader economic and political crisis, with effects stretching from the Middle East to the United States itself.
Iran and the Strategy of Escalation
The United States was not the only party to miscalculate. Iran has also discovered that its strategy of dragging the region into the conflict would not shield it from American missiles.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Tehran attempted through strikes targeting airports, energy facilities, ports and data centres in the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia to weaken the economies of these countries and push them to pressure Washington to end the war under Tehran’s conditions.
However, Gulf states demonstrated a high level of resilience, as their air defence systems succeeded in intercepting most Iranian drones and missiles.
The report quoted Bader Al Saif, a historian at Kuwait University, who said: “What harms us harms the Iranians as well, and their ability to endure is weaker than ours. We are able to adapt, and I do not believe they will be able to continue.”
Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, stated that Tehran’s strategy is based on maintaining pressure until it exhausts the defences of its adversaries and forces Washington to negotiate.
However, he indicated that this calculation may be overstated, as the United States still retains significant offensive capabilities, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Ultimately, these developments reveal that the war promoted as a swift operation is turning into a complex economic and political test for both Washington and Tehran. If the conflict continues, it may lead to wider escalation, particularly if vital maritime routes such as the Strait of Hormuz remain closed.
