How long will the Iran war last? Experts weigh in on the debate

Since the United States and Israel launched surprise strikes on Iran last weekend, Washington has been keen to stress that the military action will end within weeks and will not turn into a so-called “eternal war.”

But experts say the United States could easily become embroiled in “Operation Epic Fury” if the Iranian regime proves more resilient than expected, and that could mean the conflict continues.

“What we are seeing is going to be more complex than the White House had hoped,” Susan Maloney, vice president of the Brookings Institution and director of foreign policy, told CNBC on Tuesday.

“Obviously, the beginning of the conflict seemed very successful with the very quick announcement of the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, which was a tremendous achievement in many respects, and the United States and Israel were able to inflict serious damage on Iran’s military capabilities.”

She added: “But the next day will also be very complicated, and I am not optimistic that we will see a quick end to this conflict, because the Iranians are rising throughout the region and this is their long-term plan.”

When the air strikes began targeting the Iranian leadership and military sites last Saturday, Khamenei was killed in his compound within hoursIt soon became clear that the attacks would not be a “one and done” case.

But US President Donald Trump said last week that the military operation in Iran would be over in “four to five weeks,” and senior officials, from Vice President J.D. Vance to Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth, stressed that this would not be a protracted, low-burning conflict of the kind seen in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Such so-called “forever wars” have proven controversial and unpopular with the American public, and are particularly resentful of Trump’s fan base, who want the president to prioritize domestic policy rather than foreign policy. Only one in four Americans supports attacks on Iran Reuters/Ipsos pollI found out last week, there were protests in Washington against the strikes.

The United States and Israel initially declared that their primary goal was to eliminate the Iranian nuclear program once and for all, but… It seems that these war goals have changed this week, with stated goals ranging from destroying Iran’s ballistic missile program to a desire 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 US ambassador to Bahrain and current executive vice president at the Arab Gulf States Institute.

“It’s a risky proposition for him,” Roebuck told CNBC on Wednesday. “There’s a lot of potential to disrupt the economy, which is what he’s very focused on. That could cause tremors in the energy markets. It could cost him tremors in the stock market, which is what he’s very focused on as well.”

He added, “Also, the issue of going to Iran and carrying out this military action was not raised in the United States. They have been a little nervous everywhere since then.” [terms of] “The rationale they presented, and polls indicate that only one in four Americans really understand and support the rationale,” Roebuck noted.

“It’s somewhat risky for his base for those reasons,” he said.

One of the biggest unknowns is whether the United States wants regime change in the Islamic Republic after Khamenei’s death, and if so, who or what should replace the supreme leader.

Hegseth also stressed that the military operation was not aimed at regime change, saying on Monday: “This is not a so-called regime change war, but Certainly the system has changed“, referring to the death of Khamenei along with other senior officials.

Torbjørn Soltvedt, senior Middle East analyst at Verisk Maplecroft, said US officials are looking for “a very quick solution to this conflict” but as things stand, “we have to prepare for a potentially extended conflict.”

He added: “We heard President Trump talking about a four- to five-week process, but Iran is a huge country with a huge population and a very extensive security apparatus, so trying to resolve that and move toward some kind of interim solution will be very difficult. But these types of talks are probably premature at this point.”

Analysts agree that the US game plan – or rather the endgame – is not clear, meaning it is difficult 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 would very likely require U.S. troops on the ground in Iran — a commitment Washington could reject, given public opinion and the potential consequences for a Republican administration.

“It is impossible that American forces would be used to invade a country the size of Iran. This is not a small country, it is a vast country,” Malcolm Rifkind, a former British foreign and defense secretary, told CNBC, warning that “the situation in Iraq will happen again, and that will not happen.”