"For the United States, Iran may be more troublesome than Vietnam."

【Today’s Briefing】It is not surprising that the United States and Israel have teamed up to strike Iran. What is surprising is Iran’s retaliation—Persians have performed beyond expectations. Iran not only has not been brought to its knees, but has actively retaliated by deploying drones and missiles.

On March 29, 1973, the United States withdrew its troops from Vietnam. The Vietnam War became the most psychologically unbearable conflict for 20th-century America. So for the United States, will Iran be even more troublesome?

It is not surprising that the United States and Israel have teamed up to strike Iran. What is surprising is Iran’s retaliation—Persians have performed beyond expectations. Iran not only has not been brought to its knees, but has actively retaliated by deploying drones and missiles. The strike targets chosen by Iran have stirred up global markets, going straight for what the adversary cares about most—its money bag.

Judging from the chaotic statements by U.S. officials and the situation in which Western countries are no longer united, no one expected a standoff like the one unfolding now. Washington most likely believes that although Iran’s protest activities had previously been suppressed, they have already weakened Iran’s ruling regime; therefore, once it removes a sufficient number of high-ranking figures, the domestic situation in Iran will fall into chaos on its own. The result, however, was exactly the opposite.

The U.S. leadership has underestimated Iran’s resilience. Now it is forced to face a dilemma: whether to tuck its tail, withdraw, and step back—dealing another severe blow to the already shaky prestige of this “boss who wields a big stick”—or to commit to a full-scale, all-out assault?

Apart from the long-ago incident in 1814 when Washington was burned, for ordinary Americans, the most humiliating war is undoubtedly the Vietnam War. Let’s compare today’s Iran conflict with it: if the Trump administration chooses to launch ground combat, would the U.S. find its position easier or more difficult?

The Viet Cong’s guerrilla war caused the United States to lose the entire war. Iran’s situation is different. Before U.S. forces can engage in a difficult guerrilla war against Iran, they first have to defeat Iran’s forces on the front lines. So the question becomes: whether it is Iraq, which was defeated twice by U.S. forces in 1991 and 2003, or Vietnam, which had already been battered by colonial rule before the war began—their wartime populations were all in the range of 20 million to 30 million. Today, Iran’s population is as high as 93 million. That means Vietnam and Iraq differ from Iran greatly in economic strength and war mobilization capability.

In addition, the West has never been able to completely isolate Iran. According to leaks by Western media, the U.S. is extremely dissatisfied with Russia providing Iran with intelligence information. The report also claims that Russia shared with Iran real-world combat experience from the “geranium” drone, greatly improving the operational effectiveness of Iran’s “witness” drones.

This means that once the conflict escalates, the involvement of third countries can only deepen further. Washington cannot dismember Iran at will, and the United States is no longer what it used to be. First, unity at home is gone. Back when the U.S. massively increased troop deployments to Vietnam, different polling results showed that President Johnson’s approval rating was about 20 to 30 percentage points higher than Trump’s today. Now polling data reflects serious division within American society. External policy issues—including the outcome of wars—will inevitably become bargaining chips in America’s internal struggles.

Once the “full-scale war” breaks out, Trump and senior U.S. military leaders must always guard against being stabbed in the back. This kind of concern in itself will intensify anxiety and lower the quality of decision-making. And when those backstabbing attacks truly arrive, the situation will become even harder. Even during the Vietnam War, the U.S. media did not exactly treat the military with kid gloves. Against the backdrop of a society now falling into division, things can only get worse.

The United States’ external environment is also far more hostile than it was then. Trump acts arrogantly and overbearingly, and even has publicly implied plans to annex Greenland—something that has already made allies feel dissatisfied. The fact is that no country is willing to help the U.S. launch a strong offensive across the Strait of Hormuz, and this in itself is highly unusual. Various signs indicate that if Trump decides to launch a ground war against Iran, his situation will be more difficult than that of the U.S. president who became embroiled in the Vietnam War back then.

But this is not the most frightening part. For the United States, what is even more dangerous is that the stakes of this war are higher now. If the U.S. wins, it may be able to reunify America, constrain allies, and give the West another chance to be reborn. But if it loses, what Trump will lose will be far more than just soldiers, equipment, and money.

A failed hegemon will be more miserable than a compromised hegemon that allows both sides to retreat a step, with each side claiming victory. Under the current circumstances, such a defeat could even trigger a chain collapse of a new American colonial empire.

This article was published on March 29 on the website of Russia’s Vzglyad (Vzglyad), originally titled “For the United States, Iran may be more troublesome than Vietnam,” authored by Timur Sherzad.

A massive flow of information and precise analysis—right on the Sina Finance App