They Really Thought Shock And Awe Would Work

After starting a war with Iran, the Trump team thought it could (1) deescalate while (2) flirting with regime change. Now Iranian missiles have targeted the huge U.S. base in Qatar

Edited by Sam Thielman

I DIDN'T EXPECT much from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's Sunday morning press briefing about the bombing of Iran. But it came as an index of just how unprepared the Trump administration is for Iran's response. 

Q: The President may not want an open-ended conflict. The Iranians may disagree. Are you prepared for a protracted war? 

SECRETARY HEGSETH Well, anything can happen in conflict, we acknowledge that, but the scope of this was intentionally limited. That's the message that we're sending with the capabilities of the American military nearly unlimited. So Iran, in that sense, has a choice, but we've made it very clear to them, this is nuclear sites. This is nuclear capabilities. This is the line that the president set, and we set that back. Now is the time to come forward for peace…

And I think Tehran is certainly calculating the reality that planes flew from the middle of America and Missouri overnight, completely undetected over three of their most highly sensitive sites, and we were able to destroy nuclear capabilities…. We believe that will have a clear psychological impact on how they view the future, and we certainly hope they take the path of negotiated peace. 

I'm being generous to Hegseth when I say he's out of his depth running the Pentagon. But here is an Iraq War veteran claiming that the Iranians will be Shocked and Awed into "negotiated peace," by which the Trump administration means nothing more than surrender. The "psychological impact" of being bombed bigly is nothing compared to the crucible of the eight-year Iran-Iraq War. That war shaped the present generation of Iranian security leadership, either through direct experience or institutional culture. 

That was the public messaging all Sunday: Iran should just surrender, and not avenge itself. The only explanation Hegseth and Vice President JD Vance could muster for why this will not become the U.S.' latest Middle Eastern quagmire is the special wisdom of Donald Trump. It was laughable to hear them speak about Trump's uniqueness after Trump made the same we-bomb-but-now-you-stop entreaty that Biden did following the first wave of U.S.-Resistance Axis exchanges of fires post-October 7. But then Trump immediately posted favorably about regime change! 

Most amazingly, Trump said it wasn't "politically correct" to embrace regime change, words that trigger his personality cult to rally around the politically-incorrect thing, which, once again, is a disastrous and unjustifiable aggression in the Middle East, the sort of thing MAGA tells itself it totally does not want. Meanwhile, Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale gleefully cheered on regime change on CNBC, saying he's  "excited to invest in Iran." 

Anyone who has paid attention to Iran for the last, say, 25 years expects it not, in fact, to surrender. They expect instead some form of Iranian asymmetric response, in keeping with the many such military responses Iran has delivered during that time. And as I write this, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps says it has fired missiles at al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, a mega-base that serves as U.S. Central Command's regional command center and a massive hub of the U.S. Mideastern military presence. The AP and the Times of Israel reports that they're targeting U.S. bases in Iraq, as well. Thus far Iran has appeared not to have killed or injured anyone, having provided advance warning—and apparently, the U.S., in anticipation of the Fordow/Natanz/Isfahan bombing, moved aircraft off-base. But we are walking up the escalation ladder in real time. 

As boastful as Hegseth was, he projected the fear at the heart of the Trump administration's bombing. In the same breath as he heralded the unfathomable power of 14 GBU-57s (and they are indeed massive bombs), he told Iran that they amounted to no more than an "intentionally limited" pinprick strike; and in fact, Trump desires no additional smoke and we should all just talk about this. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi immediately and unsurprisingly dismissed the idea. And now, for the first time in its 30-year existence,al-Udeid is under attack. Even if this is just symbolic, even if Iran is trying to send Trump the same message Hegseth sent Sunday, we don't know how Trump will respond.  

I have to say that in fairness to the Trump Team's faith in Shock and Awe, the restraint Iran showed after  the 2020 Soleimani assination and again last year after they killed the three U.S. servicemembers in Jordan must have factored into Trump's initial calculation. Both times, Iran opted to deescalate, and Trump clearly read that as weakness. This time Iran is under joint attack by the Little Satan and the Great Satan, both of whom speak openly about ending the Islamic Republic. You can bet that there are hardliners within the Iranian security and political establishments who see the restraint 2020 and 2024 leading directly to this moment, and moderates who feel unprepared to challenge the hardliners at a time like this. And they may well think, per Jeffrey Lewis, that they have to go all out to develop a bomb with what may be a substantial post-attack nuclear infrastructure, now that not having a bomb and negotiating on that basis has plainly failed to deter its adversaries. 

The point of bringing up the 2020 and 2024 U.S.-Iran confrontations is to say that Trump has now ripped up the unwritten rules of how the U.S. and Iran shoot at each other. He didn't do it by himself, as we saw in fall-winter 2023-2024 while Biden ascended an escalatory spiral. But direct U.S. bombing of Iran crosses the Rubicon. Never would Iran have hit al-Udeid before, whether or not they killed anyone. Immediately this dares Trump to defend the major U.S. base in the Middle East. The choreography for avoiding casualties tells me that Iran is also worried about the risks of escalating. No one knows what action triggers what response, proportionate or disproportionate. 

I don't know where this could go next, and that's what makes it so deeply, deeply dangerous. The Resistance Axis is battered and the Israelis have killed a whole lot of Iranian generals. But the Iranians will also have ideas for retaliation that no one in the Pentagon or the White House is anticipating, much like how George W. Bush didn't anticipate the explosively-formed penetrator, or how the first Trump administration didn't anticipate the 2019 strike on Saudi Aramco. 

"The criminal U.S. must know that in addition to punishing its illegitimate and aggressive offspring, the hands of Islam’s fighters within the armed forces have been freed to take any action against its interests and military, and we will never back down in this regard," Abdolrahim Mousavi, the latest officer to serve as Chief of Staff of the Iranian military, said on Monday before the missile attack on the Qatar base. The Iranian military staff is as blustery and florid as Hegseth is. And I don't know what Mousavi has planned beyond al-Udeid. But he doesn't sound shocked or awed. 

UPDATE, 4:15 pm ET: Trump has posted that the Iranians forewarned the U.S. of the attack directly, which helped the U.S. evacuate al-Udeid and prevent casualties. Weirdly, he thanked the Iranians, and then said: "Perhaps Iran can now proceed to Peace and Harmony in the Region, and I will enthusiastically encourage Israel to do the same.” While we don't know if this is the end of an Iranian response to the bombing, hopefully Trump's change of tone signals deescalation, which would be the best available outcome. Unfortunately, it's Trump, he's erratic, and whomever talks to him next could change his mind. 

DAVID SANGER of the Times has a bit of understatement that made me laugh: "If Iran is truly pursuing a nuclear weapon — which it officially denies — it is taking more time than any nuclear-armed nation in history." 

MY FRIEND MATT DUSS has a piece co-written with Sohrab Ahmari (!) about left-right resistance to war with Iran: "The difference is that in 2003, dissenting voices in Washington were few and far between. Today, however, sane voices on the left and right are converging in opposition. But, unless we join hands, the war machine will roll right over us."

What if we, the regular working people of this country, are the antiwar movement we've been waiting for? 

TOMORROW, JUNE 24, is the Democratic Primary in New York City. If you live here and registered as a Democrat by June 14, rank Zohran Mamdani #1, Brad Lander #2—my esteemed editor Sam ranked Brad #1 and Zohran #2, so you can see we're a big tent here at FOREVER WARS—and do not rank Andrew Cuomo. [I was on the fence until Lander not only forced ICE to arrest him in public but also wrote into the WSJ to explain himself to the least friendly audience imaginable, with the possible exception of the ICE agents he canvassed while they had him locked up. —Sam.]

If you vote, I will give you free, extra stuff at Anyone Comics on 831 Nostrand Ave. in Crown Heights, from 6pm to 8pm, where I'll be signing IRON MAN Vol. 1: THE STARK-ROXXON WAR and doing a Q&A. My energy at the signing will be psychotic, what with the Iran War, the mayoral election, the heat wave, and just everything else. You won't want to miss this! I'll have free stuff for you if you show me that voting sticker!  

FINALLY, this may happen, this may not, but preliminarily I'm booked on All In with Chris Hayes on MSNBC in the 8 p.m. hour today, Monday the 23rd. I assume we'll be talking about the Iran War. Just so you all know, MSNBC preliminarily books you the day before and then you don't learn until late afternoon if you're actually going to be on their airwaves. So, no promises, but I figured I'd promote this potential TV appearance to those of you who'd like to see my face as I discuss all this stuff. It's not like there's basketball on tonight!