Additional Coverage:
- Trump’s businessman approach to ‘existential’ Iran war may be his biggest miscalculation (themirror.com)
A former State Department official has warned that President Donald Trump’s business-style approach to resolving the conflict with Iran could be a major misjudgment, given the fundamentally different stakes involved for each country.
Frank Rose, who served as assistant secretary of state for arms control, verification, and compliance under President Barack Obama, explained that for the Iranian regime, which has spent nearly five decades preparing for potential conflict with the U.S. or its allies, this war is existential-it threatens their very survival. For the United States, however, the stakes are not nearly as high.
“This war represents an existential threat to their regime, and they will do whatever it takes to hold onto power,” Rose told The Mirror US. He pointed to the brutal crackdown on protests earlier this year, where as many as 20,000 to 40,000 Iranians were reportedly killed, underscoring the regime’s ruthless determination.
Rose emphasized that Iran’s military structure is designed to sustain long, costly wars of attrition, a challenge far greater for the U.S. than for Iran itself. “It seems Trump’s primary strategy is to leverage economic pressure rather than military force, but the real question is how much hardship the Iranians are willing to endure. History shows they are prepared to withstand a great deal-sanctions have been in place for decades and the regime remains intact.”
Highlighting the contrast, Rose noted, “If the regime falls, it’s not like losing an election-it means losing lives, livelihoods, families. They will fight fiercely.” In contrast, while U.S. military casualties would be regrettable, “this is not an existential threat to the United States or its democratic system.”
Rose expressed surprise at Trump’s negotiation-focused, business-minded approach, which he said fails to grasp the deep motivations driving the Iranian leadership. “One must understand the opponent’s perspective. This is a revolutionary regime of true believers who do not operate by the same rules as a businessman president.”
He also criticized the initial U.S. and Israeli assumption that eliminating senior Iranian leaders would topple the regime, pointing out that Iran has shown it can absorb much more pain than expected.
At its core, Rose said, the conflict is a “test of wills,” with the key question being who will endure longer. He doubts Iran will be the first to back down, especially given America’s dwindling missile defense interceptor stockpiles.
“This shortage is the result of decades of bipartisan defense planning failures,” Rose explained. “Over 30 years, Congress ignored Pentagon warnings to invest adequately in missile defense systems like THAAD and SM-3. Now, critical interceptors are depleted, partly due to shifting resources to counter Iran, leaving the U.S. vulnerable globally.”
Rose stressed that replenishing missile defense capabilities must become America’s top national security priority over the next two years. He warned that if the U.S. cannot quickly close this vulnerability, adversaries like China and Russia could exploit it, posing far greater threats than Iran’s current challenges.
Despite the urgency, Rose acknowledged that depleted stockpiles do not guarantee that China will invade Taiwan or Russia will attack the Baltics-but “they certainly see this as a weakness,” which could complicate future conflicts.
Ultimately, Rose framed the missile defense shortage as a systemic problem stemming from long-standing bipartisan neglect rather than any single administration. While Trump bears some responsibility for exhausting precision long-range missiles early in the Iran conflict, the roots of the issue extend much deeper.
As the U.S. grapples with an increasingly complex security landscape, Rose’s insights underscore the critical need for a realistic appraisal of adversaries’ motivations and a renewed commitment to shoring up America’s strategic defenses.