Recent remarks by the President of the United States (US) Donald Trump signaling to end the war suggest that his messaging on the conflict may be aimed at calming financial markets, while laying the groundwork for ending the war through a unilateral declaration of victory. While bringing a war to a close quickly can appear pragmatic, especially compared with prolonged conflicts like the US intervention in Afghanistan, the situation is far more complicated. A decisive end cannot be achieved through declaration alone, as Iran retains the ability to shape how and when the conflict concludes.
Tehran is unlikely to accept an early ceasefire because it fears that a pause in fighting would merely allow the US and Israel to regroup and potentially launch further attacks. From Iran’s perspective, the war can only end when sufficient costs have been imposed on its adversaries and the wider international system so that no state would be willing to restart hostilities. Without such costs, Iranian leaders believe that any ceasefire would only be temporary and strategically disadvantageous.
Another reason Iran may resist a quick settlement is the damage it has already suffered. Parts of its infrastructure have been hit, its missile capabilities are attacked, and its ability to export oil has been slowed down in the ongoing conflict. At the same time, the chances of meaningful sanctions relief have become even more remote. If the conflict ends now without compensation or concessions, Iran would emerge weaker than before the war began, with limited prospects for economic recovery and reconstruction.
This situation could actually increase the risk of future conflict. Iranian strategists may conclude that perceived weakness encouraged Washington and Israel to initiate the war in the first place. Allowing that weakness to persist without response could invite further military pressure later. As a result, Iran may continue targeting Israel even if the US withdraws or declares victory. There is also a possibility that regional actors could face continued tensions and that Iran might attempt to disrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz to raise the economic cost of the conflict.
Such developments would place Trump in a difficult position. If he exits the conflict while fighting continues between Iran and Israel, instability will persist and could undermine his claims of success. On the other hand, if the United States reenters the conflict after declaring victory, the credibility of that declaration would collapse, potentially triggering negative market reactions and higher political and economic costs.
Although Iran does not seek an endless war, it will likely demand meaningful concessions before agreeing to a ceasefire. These could include sanctions relief and access to frozen assets abroad. In this context, mediation by Gulf states may become important, as they may attempt to craft a diplomatic arrangement that allows both Washington and Tehran to claim success and bring the conflict to a halt.
