For 10 years, the United States was at war in Vietnam, 1965–75. It lost 55,000 of its forces and 50,000 planes and left the war without winning. In disgrace and humiliation, the U.S. had to exit from the Vietnam War because it failed to defeat North Vietnam, which had no match in firepower with America.

North Vietnam and its allies in South Vietnam were fighting a national liberation war and were imbued with courage and motivation to confront a superpower. They won that war with the exit of the United States from Saigon, the capital of South Vietnam, in April 1975.

Now, after 51 years, the United States, by attacking Iran on February 28, a country having a 7,000-year-old Persian civilisation, is in a quandary because, despite the claims made by American President Donald Trump and the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Iran’s military has been destroyed. Its leadership annihilated, the reality on the ground is different.

Iran is steadfast and, despite losing thousands of people as a result of relentless bombing by the U.S. and Israel, has not surrendered. On the contrary, despite the asymmetrical nature of the war, Iran has caused heavy damage to the U.S., Israel and their allies in the Gulf.

After spending 30 billion dollars in three weeks of war with Iran, the United States has no option but to exit the war by accepting Tehran’s three conditions as outlined by the Iranian President, Masoud Pezeshkian, on March 12: not to embark on aggression again, to pay reparations, and to accept Iran’s legitimate rights.

Unlike the June 2025 war, this time, large-scale destruction has been caused to Iran’s infrastructure, and its leadership, both civilian and military, has faced enormous damage.

Is there a realisation in the White House and the Department of War (formerly the Defence Department) that the sooner the United States agrees to a ceasefire based on Iranian conditions, the better it will be for America to avoid a Vietnam-like situation?

In the last three weeks, Iran has not surrendered and has been resilient in sustaining its struggle against foreign aggression. Truly, before February 28, the popularity of the Iranian regime was at its lowest ebb because it killed thousands of its political opponents by using colossal force against demonstrators.

But in the last three weeks, the majority of the people of Iran, despite being excessively bombed and facing enormous material and physical destruction, are highly resilient and motivated to support the regime fighting against the U.S. and Israel.

Why has the United States, since the end of the Second World War, had a history of foreign intervention and occupation without achieving any remarkable success? It has spent trillions of dollars in Korea, Vietnam, Latin American countries, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, and now Iran, but has utterly failed in its objectives.

The U.S. debt is now 37 trillion dollars, and its economy is in shambles, yet its leadership has not learned lessons from past debacles. How can the U.S., which boasts of being the world’s democracy and holds an edge in technology, military power and economy, fail to prevent Israel from luring Washington into attacking Iran on flimsy grounds that Tehran was manufacturing nuclear weapons?

What Washington needs is a ‘face-saving’ formula because withdrawing from the war without achieving its core objectives would amount to colossal damage to American prestige

What Washington needs is a ‘face-saving’ formula because withdrawing from the war without achieving its core objectives would amount to colossal damage to American prestige

Akin to the baseless charges against the regime of Saddam Hussein that it was manufacturing weapons of mass destruction, the U.S., along with the U.K., attacked Iraq in March 2003 and destroyed that country. It means the U.S. mindset holding power is imprudent and naïve when it comes to making vital decisions like embarking on war with foreign countries.

For three reasons, there is no plausible option for the Trump administration other than to consider an exit strategy from the war with Iran. First, the more the U.S. gets itself militarily involved in Iran, the more it will sink deeper and deeper into a quagmire.

America’s enormous firepower has proved to be a myth because, in the last three weeks, despite its claim that it has destroyed Iran’s command and control structure, the leadership of Iran is intact. Despite eliminating Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei along with military generals, the Iranian regime remains intact.

Its support among the masses is reflected in the mingling of Iranian President, Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei and others with people in Tehran. Despite U.S.–Israeli bombing, Iran has been able to use its ballistic missiles, drones and other weapons not only against the U.S. and Israel but also against pro-American Gulf states.

Iran’s regional and international isolation is, however, manifested in the fact that no Arab or Muslim country is coming directly in support of Tehran. The United Nations Security Council, instead of condemning the U.S. and Israel for their aggression, passed a resolution against Iran, calling upon the Islamic regime to stop attacks against Gulf and Arab countries.

But even then, Iran is steadfast, motivated and resilient. On these grounds, the U.S. has no option but to exit from its war with Iran by accepting the conditions of Tehran because these are legitimate.

The U.S. and Israel must pay reparations to Iran because they are the aggressors, must guarantee not to attack Iran again, and must respect Tehran’s legitimate interests.

Second, in the United States, the war with Iran is not actively supported by American public opinion because it is argued that, when nuclear talks were going on in Geneva, why did the U.S. attacked Iran? There was no legitimate justification for Washington to attack Iran, destabilise the world and commit an open act of aggression.

Furthermore, the American economy is in dire straits, and the impact of the war is not only felt at the global level but is also negatively influencing ordinary Americans because of the rise in prices of essential commodities, including gas.

Finally, so far, Iran has used only a fraction of its missiles and drones. Despite the claims made by the U.S. and Israel that they have destroyed missile launchers, Iranian attacks continue unabated.

Although China and Russia are not directly assisting Iran, both powers understand that the surrender of Iran will be detrimental to their interests. Furthermore, to exert pressure on the U.S., North Korea, a nuclear state, is also flexing its muscles by firing long-range missiles.

Europe is not siding with the U.S., and the longer the war continues, the more it will have a lethal impact on the global economy in the form of disrupted supply chains and escalation in oil, food and medicine prices. When Pakistan’s economy is suffering because of the Gulf War, other countries are also facing a similar situation.

It seems divisions within the Trump administration and pressure from Congress and other stakeholders will compel the U.S. to exit the war with Iran. What Washington needs is a ‘face-saving’ formula because withdrawing from the war without achieving its core objectives would amount to colossal damage to American prestige.

What that face-saving formula should be needs to be examined through diplomatic means. Here, the role of Europe, ASEAN countries, Russia and China matters and would require flexibility on the part of both the U.S. and Israel to end the war.

Since Iran is a victim of U.S.–Israeli aggression, it cannot grant concessions. It makes sense that Iranian conditions are legitimate because unless there are firm guarantees on the part of the United Nations Security Council to honour the sovereignty of Iran and respect its legitimate interests, along with paying compensation for the losses it incurred in three weeks of war, there will be no end to the conflict.

Once the war ends, the United States must analyse what went wrong and how its total consonance with Israel in attacking Iran caused enormous damage to its interests. It should also be a lesson that Washington should keep its hands off Iran and other countries where it has militarily intervened.

The case of Venezuela is also relevant: it is highly reprehensible to abduct its President along with his wife on flimsy charges. Before the American economy collapses and its internal fault lines damage the country, it is better that the U.S. learns lessons from its foreign policy adventures, including Iran, and formulates an exit strategy from its war.

© The Friday Times