Barging Into War - Where’s The Exit?
The Steady State | by Charles A. Ray
Wars are easy to start, but hard to end. We should have learned this lesson in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Contrary to what many people seem to believe, ending a war is not a simple matter of wiping one's hands and declaring victory.
The recent three-way Israel-Iran-US conflict, which might or might not be ended by a cease-fire announced by the American president after an exchange of fire between Iran and the US, is a case in point.
From the start, this conflict, which has much of the world on edge, has been a classic example of how not to wage war.
On June 13, 2025, Israel launched air strikes against Iran, claiming that Iran’s nuclear program represents a ‘threat to Israel’s very survival,” despite assurances by U.S. intelligence and international experts that Iran was not close to building nuclear weapons. The Israeli attacks came at a time when the U.S. and Iran had just revived negotiations regarding Iran’s nuclear program, looking at resuming an agreement that American President Donald Trump pulled out of in 2016. The talks were further disrupted by Trump’s statements regarding the conflict, first teasing U.S. strikes on the country, and then, after attacking three of Iran’s nuclear test sites, hinting at the possibility of ‘regime change.’
Needless to say, to an experienced diplomat who served in the trenches for 30 years, not to mention 20 years in the Army (with service as an intelligence officer), this doesn’t strike me as a particularly effective way to bring a war to a definite end. Despite Trump’s announcement of a cease-fire that both sides had agreed to, within hours, he had to admit that both had violated the cease-fire.
Iran’s response to the U.S. air strikes was to launch missiles at the U.S. air base in Qatar, an action that Iran announced in advance, and which caused no American casualties. The Iranian action appeared to be a symbolic gesture and an effort to de-escalate, but does it signal an end to hostilities? Historical and contemporary evidence suggests that it does not.
Israel and Iran were allies until the 1979 Islamic Revolution, with Israel regarding Iran as an ally against the Arab states, and Iran welcoming U.S.-backed Israel as a counterweight to the Arab countries. After ousting the Shah and establishing an Islamic state led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, Iran scrapped all agreements with Israel and strongly criticized Israel for its occupation of Palestinian territories. While some in Iran support relations with Israel, and some 20,000 Jews still live in Iran, a large percentage of the population is openly hostile to Israel. Since 1991, relations between the two countries have been marked by open hostility.
According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, as of May 17, 2025, Iran had amassed over 900 pounds (409 kg) of uranium that has been enriched to 60 percent (90 percent is required to use as a weapon), and it only takes approximately 42 kg to produce one atomic bomb. There are unconfirmed reports that Iran moved this material from Furdow, one of the three sites the U.S. attacked with bunker-busting bombs, well before the strike. This would seem to contradict claims by President Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth that the three sites were ‘completely and totally obliterated.’ Experts say, however, that the U.S. strikes didn’t destroy Iran’s stocks of highly enriched uranium.
If the stocks were not destroyed, Iran’s nuclear program would be delayed but not destroyed, and its desire to possess nuclear weapons could increase. Israel alone cannot end the program without toppling the Iranian regime, and it’s unlikely it could, even with U.S. help. Without regime change, and this, as we learned in Iraq and Libya, brings on a whole new set of problems, it is likely that even in the unlikely event that the stocks were destroyed, Iran would remain determined to pursue the program. So, the “12-Day War,” as Trump calls it, will have achieved nothing but an increase in tensions in an already tense region and has left the door open for more conflict in the future.
Israel and the U.S. barged through the door into war without having a map to the exit, and the doors open to both countries now look increasingly like trap doors leading to more trouble.
Charles A. Ray spent 20 years in the U.S. Army with two tours in Vietnam. He retired as a senior US diplomat, serving 30 years in the U.S. Foreign Service, with assignments as ambassador to the Kingdom of Cambodia and the Republic of Zimbabwe, and was the first American consul general in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. He also served in senior positions with the Department of Defense and is a member of The Steady State.
Founded in 2016, The Steady State is a nonpartisan, nonprofit 501(c)(4) organization of more than 290 former senior national security professionals. Our membership includes former officials from the CIA, FBI, Department of State, Department of Defense and Department of Homeland Security. Drawing on deep expertise across national security disciplines including intelligence, diplomacy, military affairs and law, we advocate for constitutional democracy, the rule of law and the preservation of America’s national security institutions.