Donald Trump has started a war against Iran that is now not going his way.image: keystone/watson
It has now been three weeks since the American-Israeli attack on Iran. Middle East and geopolitics lecturer Andreas Böhm draws six conclusions about the course of the war so far and explains why a fall of the mullahs would pose risks for Europe.
March 21, 2026, 10:03March 21, 2026, 10:03
Donald Trump miscalculated
US President Donald Trump has already declared the Iran war won in front of his own supporters. But the reality is different. The US forces have with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei The Iranian supreme leader was eliminated, but the mullahs’ regime survived. The collapse that Trump had hoped for did not materialize. Iranian troops are still shelling various energy facilities in the Middle East. In addition, the number of wounded US soldiers has risen to 200 and the war is becoming more and more expensive: The Pentagon now wants an additional $200 billion.
Things are also going badly for Trump personally. A poll by The Economist shows that his actions in Iran are increasingly being rejected by American voters. Even the strong support among his Republicans is crumbling. The American counterterrorism chief Joe Kent resigned in protest and subsequently criticized Trump’s leadership style. HSG lecturer Andreas Böhm states: “Trump has massively miscalculated.”
Without a strategy, a war cannot be won, even with the US military
The war in Iran reveals the difference between Donald Trump’s strategic skills and those of his generals, says Böhm: “The American military has prepared various scenarios and, by eliminating Khamenei and military installations, has proven that it works very well.”
Andreas Böhm does not see any strategy in US President Donald Trump.Image: zvg
To person
Andreas Böhm is a lecturer in international law and international affairs at the University of St. Gallen. His research interests include geopolitics, philanthropy and the Middle East.
However, that is not enough for a military victory. A plan, strategy and an idea of what is to be achieved are essential. “Everything is currently missing from Donald Trump,” says Böhm. Since the outbreak, some contradictory statements have come from the Trump administration about the goals in Iran. It was unclear whether the USA would prioritize the elimination of Iran’s nuclear facilities or regime change. On Thursday evening, the Guardian reported that, according to US intelligence director Tulsi Gabard, the focus is now on destroying Iran’s missile launch and production capabilities.
Iran is pursuing a clear strategy
Unlike Donald Trump, Andreas Böhm sees a clear strategy on Iran’s side. “From the beginning, the Iranians tried to drive up the costs for their opponents,” he says.
This can be seen, for example, in the Strait of Hormuz, an important sea route for global trade in oil and liquid gas. Shipping traffic there has come to a standstill because Iran is threatening to fire. The result of this is high gasoline prices worldwide. They are intended to deprive Trump of his voters’ favor and cause other governments to increase the pressure on the American president.
The Iranians are not trying to beat the USA militarily, but rather to make the war as unbearable for them as possible. This can also be seen in the organization of the military. The Iranian armed forces are decentralized and can operate relatively independently of one another. Bringing about a collapse of the army is difficult even for the powerful US military.
The USA is no longer considered reliable in Europe
Donald Trump recently said that he wants to secure the Strait of Hormuz. For this he has called for military help from NATO states. Instead, he received rebuffs from major European countries. For example, France denied Trump military support. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz made it clear on Monday: “We are not taking part in this war.” And Great Britain only allowed the Americans to use its bases on Friday evening.
For Andreas Böhm, this is a sign that the USA is no longer considered reliable, especially since it has left the Europeans to fend for themselves when it comes to supporting Ukraine. “Without insisting on their own interests, the European NATO partners cannot enter into negotiations about assistance in Iran,” says Böhm.
The mullahs are holding on, but are weakened
Since 1979, the authoritarian mullahs’ regime has led Iran in a repressive and theocratic manner. Donald Trump also justified the war by saying he wanted to eliminate it. To achieve this, the USA and Israel relied on violence: the spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in an air strike. Israel recently confirmed the elimination of Iranian intelligence chief Esmail Chatib.
These strikes certainly damaged the stability of the regime, says Middle East expert Andreas Böhm. This is mainly because many officials who are important to the functioning of the government were killed. For example, security chief Ali Larijani. But at least so far the mullahs have been able to hold on to power. Preparations for possible losses played a crucial role, says Böhm: “There are up to four potential successors on the list for certain leadership positions.”
Political chaos is more likely than classic regime change
Large parts of the Iranian population long for a change of power in their country. But there is no organized opposition to the government; the repression has been too strong in recent years. Andreas Böhm therefore considers a regime change with a popular uprising to be unlikely, despite the American-Israeli attacks. “It would probably take years of work to build an opposition movement,” he says.
However, a scenario like that in Libya is conceivable. After the fall of the dictator Muammar Gaddafi In 2011, power was divided between various militias, which continue to fight each other today. The confusing situation now makes Libya a scene of drug and human trafficking. For Böhm, a comparable situation in Iran would be a worst-case scenario: “The human suffering would be great, and the result would be flows of refugees all the way to Europe.” And there would be a risk that enriched uranium from Iranian nuclear facilities would indirectly fall into the hands of terrorist militias, where it would be even more difficult to control.