Three American fatalities, silence from the White House - what's really happening here?
Three Americans were killed within 48 hours,
For months, Trump declared a powerful response - if such a thing were to happen.
In practice, the public response was minimal.
And precisely this silence became the central point of interest.
According to Aaron Miller, a former senior official at the State Department, there are two possibilities:
Either Trump is showing restraint - to prevent public escalation, or the silence is meant to conceal military actions already underway...
Concurrently - reports of significant reinforcement of American forces in the region, including refueling aircraft, F-15s, F-16s, and F-35s - a move that may indicate broader preparations and not just the continuation of CENTCOM's routine activities.
The bigger problem is - that the conditions that usually end wars do not currently exist.
According to war scholar William Zartman's theory - wars end when a 'painful stalemate' is created - a situation where both sides realize that time is no longer on their side, that escalation is no longer beneficial, and that the price is unbearable.
Currently - none of these conditions are met.
The US and Iran still believe that time is playing in their favor.
The US and Iran view escalation as a tool that serves their goals.
The US and Iran believe they are capable of bearing the cost.
This is precisely why the risk of continued fighting remains high.
History is also not encouraging,
Studies on wars between states indicate that the average lifespan of such a conflict is about 4-5 months.
When wars last beyond that - they tend to turn into prolonged wars of attrition that are difficult to end.
Another point Miller emphasizes is that there is currently no clear political settlement that can be reached.
The more the conflict focuses on control over strategic shipping lanes and straits - the harder it is to build a framework where both sides can declare victory and back down.
And the most significant gap? In interests.
For the United States, this is an important strategic interest, but not an existential question,
For the Iranian leadership - the results of the war may directly affect the stability of the regime and its internal standing.
When one side fights for its survival, it is usually willing to pay a much higher price.
This is also why major powers find it difficult to impose a decisive outcome on a smaller adversary who feels they have nothing to lose.
Examples from Ukraine - from Gaza, and from Lebanon illustrate how difficult it is to achieve a decisive outcome even when there is a huge gap in military capabilities.
The market usually likes certainty,
Currently, it is getting exactly the opposite - a war without a clear exit path, with each side still convinced that time is working in its favor.
And the silence - is louder than any news headline.