On July 25th, President Trump ordered the US military to suspend new airstrikes on Iran, ending nearly two weeks of continuous strikes.
According to reports, Trump had been approving daily military strike plans against Iran, but on the 25th, he received a new operational plan and did not authorize it. Insiders say this move aims to leave more room for diplomatic negotiations, and also reflects a belief that the current airstrikes have largely achieved their maximum effect.
After a temporary ceasefire memorandum was signed on June 18th, conflict flared up again over control of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has demanded that passing vessels use routes near its coastline and hinted at future “service fees,” while the US continued to strike Iran’s coastal defense systems, even bridges and infrastructure in the south. Iran’s retaliation then involved attacks on US bases in Persian Gulf nations.
Analysts point out that the suspension of airstrikes on Iran is driven by multiple real-world pressures, including military cost-cutting, making way for diplomacy, and avoiding a complete loss of control over the situation.
An insider reveals that figures like Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley are particularly concerned about negative impacts like dwindling US ammunition stockpiles. The US military’s inventory of “Patriot” interceptor missiles and other air defense munitions in the Middle East is severely depleted, and numerous aircraft and transport vehicles at US bases have been damaged. Continuing to escalate strikes would further strain the US military’s deployment capabilities in the region.
A report from the cross-party think tank “Center for Strategic and International Studies” estimates that it will take US defense contractors at least three years to replenish the “Tomahawk” cruise missiles, “Patriot,” and “THAAD” interceptor missiles heavily used in the Iran conflict. The White House has repeatedly pushed automakers to convert production lines for “Patriot” missiles in a bid to urgently ramp up ammunition output.
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin testified last week before the Senate Appropriations Committee, revealing that the war with Iran has cost $37.5 billion so far. Professor Linda Bilmes from the Kennedy School at Harvard University predicts the long-term total cost of the US war in Iran could exceed $1 trillion. For comparison, the US defense budget for 2025 is $895 billion.
Meanwhile, the US is worried that continued escalation could draw in more parties like the Houthis, Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Iraq, making the situation even more complex.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to leave for Washington tomorrow, where he is expected to present Trump with the latest intelligence on Iran’s military and nuclear program, emphasizing that Iran is accelerating its nuclear weapons development in an attempt to push the US to intensify military strikes against Iran.
On July 26th, Iranian Armed Forces spokesman Brigadier General Abolfazl Shekarchi stated that the US is currently seeking a new strategy, and whether it withdraws from the conflict depends on Israel’s agreement. With Netanyahu’s visit to the US, Iran may face scenarios involving airstrikes or ground military operations. However, in a ground war option, the US “will face greater vulnerability.”
Michael Singh, director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, says that if the ceasefire continues for several more days, it would indicate that diplomatic efforts are gaining the upper hand.
A Middle Eastern official involved in specific mediation efforts reveals that the pause in mutual strikes between the US and Iran helps de-escalate the conflict, as both countries want to return to implementing the memorandum. The core of the negotiation plan currently under discussion involves the US easing its naval blockade of Iran, while Iran reduces restrictions on navigation.
On issues like control of the Strait, the US and Iran are almost poles apart. Without a stable balance on these matters, conflict is bound to reignite.
Singh says reopening the strait is a common goal for both the US and Iran, as many Americans are frustrated with soaring oil prices, which could put the Republican Party at a disadvantage in the November congressional races. One of the challenges the US faces is the power struggle among different factions within Iran’s leadership. Iran’s top decision-makers may fear that compromise with the US would be seen as weakness, ultimately costing them their leadership.
Various signs indicate that after a period of turmoil, Iran’s political scene has undergone a round of power transition, with the hardline military faction led by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) further strengthening its internal influence and directly dictating the negotiation process with the US.
Currently, the IRGC Navy is continuously patrolling and monitoring the approximately 240,000 square kilometers of sea in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, asserting control. The IRGC reiterates that no vessel will be allowed to pass through the Strait of Hormuz if it does not accept and comply with the rules and regulations set by Iran. In the past 24 hours, six ships have been forced to anchor and comply with IRGC directives after receiving warnings.
On the other hand, the US military is still drafting plans to resume large-scale airstrikes. If talks collapse or Iran is deemed to have committed “violations,” strikes could be relaunched at any time, including deploying heavy bombers to target the “Mount Damavand” underground facility.
“Mount Damavand” is located about 1.6 kilometers south of Iran’s Natanz uranium enrichment facility and houses two deeply buried tunnel complexes. Israel believes that after the 12-day war ended last June, Iran transferred advanced centrifuges and some of its enriched uranium stockpile to this underground facility.
Iran has previously drawn a red line: if this facility is attacked, all military and economic assets of the US and its allies in the Middle East will become targets for Iranian armed forces.