The Island Dilemma: Quick American Victory or Protracted War?

With the US-Iran conflict dragging on, and Israel remains silent, the best path forward is a peaceful dialogue, not boots on the ground, security expert Ret. Col. Dencio Acop writes.

COL Dencio S. Acop (Ret), PhD, CPP | April 7, 2026

MANILA — Similar to Vladimir Putin’s desire to quickly triumph over Ukraine, Donald Trump thought that American superiority would easily defeat Iran, bring it down on its knees, and control its oil away from China benefiting the American people.

It is over a month now and there is no convincing indicator that Iran will capitulate soon and hand the United States (and Israel) the decisive victory it demands. While the US President sounds overly optimistic about achieving US aims from the attack, realities on the ground say otherwise. Iran itself denies the president’s claims. News coming out of Fox News and CNN contradict each other. Truth is that the claim of victory on the part of the US is premature at best. (Also read: Iran is Turning Out to be Another Vietnam but Worse)

While the attack killed the Iranian supreme leader, it has not resulted in the people power revolution anticipated by the Pentagon. The slain leader was merely replaced by his son, and the political infrastructure of the non-secular Iranian government has remained. Any grievances of the people against their government have instead been overshadowed by their collective disdain for foreign interference against their sovereignty.

The killing of his father has emboldened the new Ayatollah to rally his people against foreign aggression. The Iranian people are now seeing the killing of their Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during Ramadan as fueling another sacred struggle against Estekbar (foreign domination) activating the dormant Basij and turning the entire population into a paramilitary force prepared to die as martyrs. Martyrdom lies at the heart of Iran’s protracted war strategy against the US and Israel if they persist in prosecuting the war they’ve unleashed.

Meanwhile, there is the strategic island of Kharg which is the hub for 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports. This island lies in the northern Persian Gulf, about 27 kilometers off the Iranian coast. Naturally, the island is a target for US forces, with discussions revolving around its potential seizure to disrupt Iranian oil revenue and curb its influence, while Iran has fortified it with military assets to prevent this. The US has every reason to destroy the island if its sole goal is to defeat Iran and impose its will.

However, it hasn’t done so. Whether the US and Israel will attack Kharg or not remains to be seen. But the economic realities involved provide a clue as to which direction the ultimate decision on the island will head towards. One key point is that the destruction of Kharg will serve no strategic political and economic values to Trump and the American people.

Diminishing global oil supply by disrupting a major source will not make commodities become more affordable as promised by Trump. American voters are already indicating that inflation and the cost of living are their biggest concerns ahead of the upcoming midterm elections in November.

At peak capacity, the oil export terminal sitting on Kharg can process millions of barrels of oil per day accounting for an extraordinary 90% of Iranian crude exports and tens of billions of US dollars of annual government revenue, according to The Conversation UK.

Another point is that US intervention in Iran is already causing rising prices even if Trump does not attack Kharg Island. This is due to the disruption in global shipping caused by Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. And Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei has vowed that he’ll keep on blocking the waterway which has already caused oil prices to soar as high as US$100 per barrel. Some analysts are predicting that prices could rise to as much as US$150 a barrel if Kharg is hit.

Aside from Kharg Island, Abu Musa and the Tunbs (Greater and Lesser) as well as Qeshm Island are other key terrains of potential martial interest to the US and Israel due to their proximity to the Strait of Hormuz. Qeshm, for instance, is targeted for being a “secret missile fortress” for Iran. Drones and missiles are being launched from these island features just off the southern coast of Iran.

Recently, United Arab Emirates has been leading the advocacy for the US and Israel to put boots on the ground to decisively defeat Iran. Part of this reason is the long history of land disputes between UAE and Iran among them Abu Musa and the Tunbs ever since Iran occupied them in 1971. Attacking these identified islands presents no significant operational challenges for the US and Israel.

However, the aftermath of a successful attack would hold no long-term political and economic values for Trump. A devastated Iranian economy “would undermine any pretense that Trump is acting in the interests of the Iranian people, as he has claimed, since any new government would be financially crippled if the regime did collapse.”

Trump’s recent State of the Nation address raised more questions than provided answers about the Iran War. This is due in large part to the fact that Trump’s objectives in Iran are unclear undermined by the fundamental contradiction between stated objectives and the political and economic costs the US is willing to incur in their pursuit.

Meanwhile, Israel seems silent in all this. Apart from trading missiles with Iran’s allies, which is nothing new, Tel Aviv appears disinterested in the secular objectives being voiced by Washington. From Israel’s actions in this war, decisive victory in a non-secular nature is implicitly stated. The Jewish state supports key Gulf allies Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Kuwait in urging the Trump administration to achieve decisive victory over Iran. The coalition cites long-term regional stability as the objective. (Also read: US insists the destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities)

However, this is easier said than done. A ground invasion into Iran may escalate the regional conflict in ways not anticipated by the coalition. Iran has its own military capability which is significant, supported by China and Russia, and its regional allies as well. Martyrdom as a strategy by the Iranian people will be a costly enemy to defeat. If pushed against the wall, intelligence sources say that Iran has the capacity to activate dormant cells and wage protracted asymmetric warfare against its enemies.

As things stand, continued violence will only beget more violence leading to escalation with its attendant risks, including the potential use of unconventional weapons systems. Only sincere dialogue among the protagonists in an atmosphere of goodwill and trust can achieve results worthy of human dignity, peace, and equal prosperity.