Donald Trump rose to the presidency on a promise to end America’s “forever wars” and avoid new military entanglements, particularly in the Middle East. He often blames global instability on former Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama, but he reserves his harshest criticism for President George W. Bush and the neoconservative movement, which he accuses of dragging the U.S. into costly and endless Middle Eastern conflicts.
Yet with his recent decision to order strikes against Iran, Trump tied himself to the very neoconservative vision he once derided. Rhetoric aside, Trump has now become the ultimate neocon. And if he hopes to succeed, he must see that vision through.
The neoconservative doctrine — crystallized during the Bush administration — aimed to reshape the Middle East by removing authoritarian regimes, eliminating weapons of mass destruction, and ultimately securing regional peace through U.S. military power. The invasion of Iraq was the signature act of this strategy. Trump has repeatedly ridiculed that war as a mistake, yet by launching strikes against Iran, he has adopted the same logic: The use of force to achieve long-term strategic transformation in the region.
To avoid the very “forever war” he once promised to end, Trump must now follow through on the neocon playbook. That means embracing a strategic objective beyond limited airstrikes. Trump must work on forever eliminating Iran’s ability to build a nuclear weapon, dismantling its theocratic regime and laying the groundwork for regional realignment — between Israel, Iran and the Arab Gulf states.
It’s a mistake to assume that Iran’s current leadership is permanent. The shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, ruled for nearly four decades, and many believed his regime would last indefinitely — until it collapsed in 1979. The current Iranian Islamic Republic has now ruled for roughly the same length of time. Its longevity is no more guaranteed than the shah’s.
Recent Israeli — and now American — strikes on Iran have exposed serious vulnerabilities in the regime. By degrading its nuclear program and Israel demonstrating complete control over Iranian airspace, these attacks have shaken the foundations of Iran’s power. Without the deterrent of a nuclear arsenal and with weakened internal confidence, the regime may be more fragile than at any point since 1979.
If the Iranian regime were to fall — perhaps through an internal military coup, catalyzed by Trump’s actions — the entire regional dynamic could shift. For decades, Iran has sought to dominate the region as the preeminent Shiite and Persian power, in opposition to the Sunni and Arab Gulf states led by Saudi Arabia. Israel, meanwhile, has viewed a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat. A post-theocratic Shiite Iran that prioritizes stability over ideological expansion could pursue peaceful coexistence with its Sunni Arab neighbors — and possibly reach a détente with Israel.
Such a transformation could usher in an era of relative peace and stability in a region long defined by conflict. But this outcome is only possible if Trump commits to completing the strategy he has now initiated. Without that commitment, his strike on Iran merely risks escalating tensions without achieving meaningful change. A half-measure could backfire — provoking Iran into accelerating its nuclear ambitions and intensifying regional conflicts involving Israel and the Gulf states. This is the precise “forever war” Trump vowed to avoid.
Trump states he first ran against “warmonger” Hillary Clinton, in part, for her support of the Iraq War, and he repeatedly lambasted Bush for what he called a “stupid” decision to invade Iraq. But with his own decision to strike Iran, Trump now finds himself embracing the very framework he once mocked. The choice before him is stark: either follow through on the neocon vision he has inadvertently adopted or risk becoming the failed foreign policy leader he so often condemns.
Charles K. Djou served in Congress from 2010-2011 and was a member of the House Armed Services Committee. He is an Afghanistan War Veteran.