WASHINGTON — As the Iran nuclear deal effectively collapses following a series of aggressive strikes by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), national security veterans are heavily advocating for a return to maximum pressure tactics. Defense specialists warn that the current diplomatic framework is no longer viable, urging the administration to leverage economic and military force to compel Tehran back into compliance.
The urgency for a hardened stance stems from a dramatic escalation in regional hostilities. Over a recent 24-hour period, the IRGC launched missiles that struck at least three commercial tankers, with numerous other vessels targeted in preceding days. Furthermore, a missile fired toward Bahrain—reportedly aimed at a U.S. military installation—was intercepted.
Roger Zakheim, director at the Ronald Reagan Institute and co-founder of the Reagan National Defense Forum, did not mince words regarding the status of the existing Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Declaring the agreement “dead as December,” Zakheim argued that the fundamental issue transcends the technicalities of the pact; it is about whether Iran has any genuine intention of functioning as a responsible nation seeking a diplomatic resolution.
Aaron Cohen, an Israeli Special Operations veteran and founder of Gideon, highlighted the internal disconnect within the Iranian regime. While non-hardliner diplomats were the ones negotiating for financial cash infusions, the actual decision-makers—the IRGC—continue to fire upon navigating ships and resist transparency regarding their nuclear enrichment programs. Cohen emphasized that maintaining freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and demanding nuclear transparency are non-negotiable, rendering the current MOU entirely useless if it fails to alter Tehran’s behavior.
The initial diplomatic push was largely driven by the straightforward goal of reopening the Strait of Hormuz to lower domestic fuel costs—a metric the administration successfully achieved, pushing the national average below $4 a gallon. However, with the cash infusion spigot now turned off via initiatives like Operation Epic Fury and Operation Economic Fury, the focus has shifted back to coercion.
To enforce this coercion, the Treasury Department recently announced the restoration of sanctions targeting Iranian oil sales, with a compliance deadline set for August 21. Zakheim lauded Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent for his aggressive application of economic theory, hailing him as the most effective wartime Treasury secretary since World War II. Meanwhile, the military perspective remains highly hawkish; retired General Keith Kellogg has publicly stated that it is time to resume bombing campaigns.
Despite these aggressive recommendations, President Trump continues to favor a diplomatic approach. After reviewing military options alongside Joint Chiefs of Staff General Pain and Secretary Pete Hegseth, the President opted to maintain diplomatic channels for the time being. However, experts note that Trump’s unpredictability serves as a massive strategic advantage. By keeping adversaries off-balance and threatening crushing sanctions, the administration maintains “strategic uncertainty.” Zakheim noted that while Trump calls the Iranian leadership “lunatics,” his patience may eventually run out, signaling it is time to “dial it up” once again.
Beyond the Middle East, the geopolitical focus shifts to the Arctic and alliance management, specifically regarding Trump’s push to bring Greenland under U.S. control during recent NATO meetings. Zakheim explained that Greenland is paramount to U.S. national security, echoing Cold War strategies and addressing the growing footprint of the People’s Republic of China in the region.
By introducing the Greenland topic at NATO summits, Trump intentionally puts European allies on their heels. According to Zakheim, this unconventional tactic is designed to motivate NATO members to take their security obligations seriously. It serves as a unique method to transform the alliance’s dynamics, ensuring members step up their defense spending and readiness without taking actions that would invite Vladimir Putin to undermine the unity of the free world.