Plumes of smoke rise over the skyline on March 3, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.
Majid Saeedi | Getty Images
Since the U.S. and Israel launched surprise strikes on Iran last weekend, Washington has been keen to stress that the military action will be over in a matter of weeks and won’t turn into a so-called “forever war.”
But experts say the U.S. could easily get bogged down in “Operation Epic Fury” if the Iranian regime proves more resilient than expected, and that could mean the conflict drags on.
“What we’re seeing is going to be more complicated than the White House may have hoped,” Suzanne Maloney, Brookings Institution vice president and director of foreign policy, told CNBC Tuesday.
“Obviously, the start of the conflict appeared to be tremendously successful with the very quick announcement that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran, had been killed, that was a huge breakthrough in many respects and the U.S. and Israel have been able to do immense damage to Iran’s military capabilities.”
“But the day after is going to be immensely complicated as well, and I am not optimistic that we’re going to see a quick end to this conflict, because the Iranians are escalating across the region and that is their long-standing game plan,” she said.
When airstrikes began to target Iran’s leadership and military sites last Saturday, killing Khamenei in his compound within hours, it quickly became apparent that the attacks would not be a case of “one and done.”
But U.S. President Donald Trump has said in the last week that the military operation in Iran would be over in “four to five weeks” and top officials, from Vice President JD Vance to Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth, have stressed that this will not be a prolonged, low-burn conflict of the type seen in Afghanistan or Iraq.
Such so-called “forever wars” have proved contentious and unpopular with the American public and are particularly frowned upon by Trump’s MAGA fanbase who want the president to prioritize domestic rather than foreign policy. Just one in four Americans supports the attacks on Iran, a Reuters/IPSOS poll found in the last week, and there have been protests in Washington against the strikes.
WASHINGTON DC, UNITED STATES – FEBRUARY 28: Demonstrators gathered outside the White House in Washington DC, to protest US and Israeli strikes on Iran. Protesters carried Iranian and American flags as they chanted anti-war slogans during the rally. The demonstration took place in front of the White House, drawing participants who voiced opposition to the recent military actions. (Photo by Celal Gunes/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Anadolu | Anadolu | Getty Images
Game plan, or big gamble?
The U.S. and Israel initially stated their primary aim was to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program once and for all, but those war aims appear to have shifted this week, with the stated objectives ranging from destroying Iran’s ballistic missile program to wanting to protect the American public from an imminent, but unspecified, Iranian threat.
Trump will be very wary of public opinion when it comes to operations in Iran, according to William Roebuck, former U.S. Ambassador to Bahrain and current executive vice president at the Arab Gulf States Institute.
“It’s a risky proposition for him. There’s a lot of possibility of disruption of the economy, which he’s very focused on. This could cause jolts in the energy markets. It could cost jolts in the stock market which h’s very focused on as well,” Roebuck told CNBC Wednesday.
“He also hasn’t really made the case in the United States for the cause of going into Iran and taking this military action. They’ve been a bit all over the place in [terms of] the rationales that they’ve offered, and polling indicates that only one in four Americans really get the rationale and supports it,” Roebuck noted.
“It’s a bit risky to his base for those reasons,” he said.
One of the biggest unknowns is whether the U.S. wants regime change in the Islamic Republic after the death of Khamenei and, if so, who or what should replace the supreme leader.
Hegseth has also stressed that the military operation is not about regime change, stating Monday: “This is not a so-called regime change war, but the regime sure did change,” referring to Khamenei’s death alongside other senior officials.
Torbjorn Soltvedt, principal Middle East analyst at Verisk Maplecroft, said U.S. officials are looking for a “very, very swift resolution to this conflict” but as things stand now, “we’ll have to brace for potentially an extended conflict.”
“We’ve heard President Trump talk about a four to five week operation, but Iran is a huge country with a huge population, very extensive security apparatus, so trying to untangle that and move towards some kind of interim solution is going to be extremely difficult. But those types of conversations are probably premature at this stage,” he said.
A television station broadcasts US President Trump on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York, US, on Monday, March 2, 2026.
Michael Nagle | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Analysts agree that the U.S.’ game plan — or rather, its endgame — is not clear and that means it’s tricky to determine how long the military operation will take. Many liken the current operation in Iran to a “gamble” on Trump’s part.
If the goal is regime change, experts say it’s highly likely that it would require American boots on the ground in Iran — a commitment Washington could well balk at, given public opinion and the potential consequences for the Republican administration.
“There is no way American forces are going to be used to invade a country of the size of Iran. This is not some small country, it’s a vast country,” Malcolm Rifkind, the U.K.’s former foreign and defense secretary, told CNBC, warning, “it would be an Iraq situation all over again, and that’s not going to happen.”
Short war possible
While a reluctance to get bogged down in potentially protracted and bloody ground war still stands, analysts say a short and targeted military operation is possible — but it depends ultimately on what Trump wants, and how long Iran’s leadership can survive a U.S.-Israeli onslaught.
Robert Macaire, a former U.K. Ambassador to Iran, agreed that “a ‘forever war’ is not a very likely scenario because Iran does not have the ability to continue retaliation “indefinitely.”
“Strikes are going after launchers, Iranian command, there must come a point where launches become sporadic and this can wind down,” he said.
Signum Global Advisors’ Charles Myers said that there’s only one outcome to the conflict: Iran loses.
“This is not a long term or a even a medium term war … There is only one outcome here, which is Iran will lose. Iran is up against two of the most powerful, sophisticated militaries in the world and Iran will lose this war. The question is what does losing look like and how long will that take,” he told CNBC Thursday.
Myers expects the kinetic part of the war would “be done in the next three to four days.”
“And after that, you’ll start to hear the U.S. president talk about off ramps or winning or victory. And I think from there, we start to see movement towards a trying to get to some kind of settlement or agreement … This is not going to be a protracted military campaign,” he said.
