Trump's Intuitive Warfare: A Misguided Strategy in the Iran Conflict

Sun Mar 29 2026 03:36:23 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time)

As President Trump leads the US in military actions against Iran, his instinct-driven approach has encountered significant challenges, raising questions about the effectiveness of such tactics in modern warfare.

The article explores President Trump's war strategy against Iran, emphasizing his reliance on instinct rather than strategic planning. The ongoing conflict, marked by a series of airstrikes following an unexpected resilience from the Iranian regime, reflects a lack of understanding of historical military strategies and the complexities of asymmetric warfare. The ramifications of a potentially prolonged engagement raise concerns over regional and global stability.

Some old truths about warfare have been knocking on the door of the Oval Office in the month since US President Donald Trump and Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sent US and Israeli warplanes to bomb Iran.

The failure to learn from the past means that Donald Trump now faces a stark choice. If he cannot get a deal with Iran, he can either try to declare a victory that will fool no-one, or escalate the war.

The oldest of the old truths comes from the Prussian military strategist Helmuth von Moltke the Elder: no plan survives first contact with the enemy. He was writing in 1871, the year Germany was unified as an empire, a moment that was as consequential for the security of Europe as this war might be for the security of the Middle East.

Maybe Trump prefers the boxer Mike Tyson's modern version: everyone has a plan until they get hit. Even more relevant for Trump are the words of one of his predecessors, Dwight D. Eisenhower, the American general who commanded the D-Day landings in 1944.

Eisenhower's version was plans are worthless, but planning is everything. He meant that the discipline and process of making plans to fight a war make it possible to change course when the unexpected happens.

For Trump, the unexpected item has been the resilience of the regime in Iran. The situation has evolved into a broader conflict than originally anticipated, impacting geopolitical dynamics greatly.

Over the first month, military successes from the US have not led to the anticipated outcomes, highlighting the regime's ability to adapt and retaliate effectively, making Trump's intuitively driven approach increasingly problematic. Without a strategic framework for engagement, the conflict risks spiraling out of control, challenging regional stability and international relations.