Jeremy Bowen: Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn’t working
Jeremy Bowen: Trump is waging war based on instinct and it isn’t working
Since the start of the recent military engagement between US and Israeli forces and Iran, several age-old principles of warfare have echoed through the Oval Office. Yet, Donald Trump appears to be ignoring these lessons, leaving him with a difficult decision. Without a successful agreement with Iran, he must either claim a hollow triumph or push the conflict further. One of the most enduring lessons from military history comes from Helmuth von Moltke the Elder, the Prussian strategist who wrote in 1871: “No plan survives first contact with the enemy.” His words were significant during the unification of Germany, an event as pivotal for European stability as the current war may be for the Middle East.
Trump might also find inspiration in Mike Tyson’s modern take: “Everyone has a plan until they get hit.” However, a more relevant insight comes from his predecessor, Dwight D. Eisenhower, the American general who led the D-Day landings in 1944 and later served as president in the 1950s. Eisenhower’s view was that “plans are worthless, but planning is everything.” He emphasized that meticulous preparation allows for swift adjustments when unforeseen challenges arise. Trump, however, seems to be acting without such foresight, relying on gut feelings rather than strategic analysis.
“The first thing you do is to take all the plans off the top shelf and throw them out the window and start once more. But if you haven’t been planning you can’t start to work, intelligently at least.”
Eisenhower’s words were delivered in a 1957 speech, following his role in orchestrating the largest amphibious operation in history. He stressed the importance of thorough preparation to adapt to changing circumstances. In contrast, Trump has shown little sign of structured planning, instead trusting his inner circle to execute decisions without much questioning. This approach has made it harder to sustain the war effort, as the US military’s powerful capabilities are not being fully utilized without clear political direction.
Four weeks ago, Trump and Netanyahu launched a bombing campaign targeting Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and his inner circle. The operation, which killed 1,464 Iranian civilians according to HRANA—a group tracking human rights abuses in Iran—was intended to spark a popular uprising. But the regime in Tehran has not collapsed. Instead, it has managed to remain functional and continue resisting. This resilience highlights the difference between Venezuela and Iran, where Trump’s hopes for a quick victory over Maduro have not translated into success.
Despite the initial strikes, opposition forces have not risen up in Iran. They are aware of the government’s brutal response to protests in January, which led to the deaths of thousands. Trump’s reliance on instinct has left him blind to these realities, forcing him to confront why his predecessors hesitated to join Netanyahu in this war of choice. Without a coherent strategy, the conflict risks becoming a costly and prolonged struggle with uncertain outcomes.