The never-ending Iran conflict has plagued multiple US presidents.

For nearly five decades, U.S. presidents from both the Democratic and Republican parties have approached Iran in various ways, combining diplomacy, sanctions, deterrence, and military force.

Image of the late Supreme Leader of Iran on the streets of Tehran. Photo: Reuters

The reason is that the primary motivation driving Tehran's behavior has remained virtually unchanged: its ideology.

'Holy War for God'

Debates in Washington often focus on tactics. Democrats prioritize diplomacy and view the 2015 nuclear agreement under former President Barack Obama as the most viable mechanism to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions and avoid war.

Meanwhile, Republicans generally advocate for a "maximum pressure" campaign and military deterrence, arguing that Iran is exploiting diplomatic agreements and continuing destabilizing activities in the region.

Both approaches have some merit, but neither fully explains why this problem persists.

The overarching theme lies not in political changes in Washington, but in the enduring nature of the Iranian regime and the deeply ingrained goals within the Islamic Republic since 1979.

What President Donald Trump is discussing with Iran – a transactional agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and potentially impose further nuclear restrictions – cannot alter the fixed trajectory of the past 47 years.

The Iranian constitution assigns the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) not only a military defense role but also a “mission to wage holy war for God.”

For decades, Iran's revolutionary leadership interpreted that mission as expanding Tehran's influence throughout the Middle East, pushing the U.S. out of the region, and supporting armed movements committed to destroying Israel.

These goals transcend the presidencies of the United States and Iran, economic crises, sanctions campaigns, or periods of diplomatic openness.

This explains the series of attacks, hostage-takings, and proxy wars that have shaped Iran-U.S. relations since the 1979 occupation of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran. It also explains why Iran has consistently invested in armed groups in the region such as Hezbollah, Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Iraqi militias, and the Houthi forces.

The IRGC is specifically designed to protect the domestic revolution and expand its influence abroad. The Quds Force—the IRGC's expeditionary arm—has spent decades building a network of allied armed groups to extend Iran's influence far beyond its national borders.

At various times, U.S. policymakers hoped that Iran's revolutionary fervor would subside in exchange for economic opportunities and reintegration into the international system. This was part of the strategic logic behind the nuclear deal under the Obama administration.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) did indeed impose significant restrictions on Iran's nuclear program for a certain period, and in that respect, it can be considered an achievement. But it did not change regional behavior or Tehran's revolutionary goals. In fact, in some respects, Iran, with its increased economic resources, has become even more confident.

Shortly after the agreement was signed, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei dismissed any speculation that Iran's stance toward Israel or the US would soften. He publicly predicted that Israel would cease to exist within 25 years and pledged to continue the "resistance" throughout the region.

That statement was not an exaggeration, but consistent with the trajectory Iran has pursued for decades.

The cycle repeats

The events of October 7, 2023, are the clearest manifestation of that trajectory.

Hamas – a force armed, funded, and supported by Iran for years – launched the deadliest attack in Israeli history, killing more than 1,200 people and taking over 250 hostages. Iranian leaders called it an act of “resistance” against Israel.

Just days later, Iranian-backed groups across the region also joined the fight. Hezbollah began launching rockets from Lebanon into northern Israel. Pro-Iranian militias in Iraq and Syria repeatedly attacked American soldiers. Houthi forces in Yemen attacked American commercial ships and naval equipment in the Red Sea.

This is the result of decades of Iranian investment in a network precisely designed for this purpose: to exert pressure on Israel and the United States on multiple fronts while still being able to deny responsibility.

Trump was the first US president to directly order attacks on Iran's top military leadership, and then authorize military operations deep into Iranian territory.

Some of those actions yielded clear tactical results. The killing of Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani in 2020 disrupted Iran's regional operations. Subsequent attacks on Iranian military and nuclear infrastructure also inflicted significant damage on Tehran's missile, UAV, and nuclear programs.

However, tactical military success does not necessarily equate to strategic success.

In fact, the events of the past few months have shown the limits of military power when confronting a deeply entrenched revolutionary system. Despite heavy losses, the Iranian apparatus appears to have become even more consolidated, with the prominent roles played by hardline figures such as Ahmad Vahedi – the new leader of the IRGC, who commanded the Quds Force for much of the 1980s and 1990s.

American tools—military, diplomatic, or economic—may be effective in weakening Iran's capabilities, but are completely ineffective in changing the ideological trajectory of the regime in Tehran.

Despite numerous reports of an impending agreement between the US and Iran, Iran's new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has reaffirmed his late father's goal: to expel the US from the Middle East and eliminate the state of Israel.

"From now on, 'Down with America' and 'Down with Israel' will be the common slogan of the Muslim community," Mojtaba Khamenei wrote this week.

To emphasize this point further, he reaffirmed his father's promise that Israel would be wiped out before 2040.

Israel may have a new government after elections later this year, but the more proactive security doctrine it adopted after the events of October 7th is unlikely to change. Israel may act immediately upon detecting a threat, whether near its borders or inside Iranian territory, including Tehran's missile program.

The U.S. will also continue to act to protect itself and its interests. Just this week, while Washington and Tehran were negotiating to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the U.S. accused the IRGC of laying new mines in the strait, leading to a brief attack.

That reality—with Iran's core ideology, Israel's tendency toward preemptive action, and the U.S. protecting its interests and personnel—will continue to pose challenges to President Trump and his successors. The world will likely continue to witness a recurring cycle of confrontation, temporary de-escalation, and renewed conflict.

Source: https://znews.vn/cuoc-chien-bat-tan-iran-deo-bam-nhieu-doi-tong-thong-my-post1655154.html