Trump’s threats to bomb Iran ‘back to the Stone Ages’ will backfire

Modern wars often begin with attacks on military targets, and end with the deliberate destruction of infrastructure that sustains civilian life.

The U.S. and Israel launched their war with Iran by attacking its leadership, nuclear facilities, command centers, air defenses and missile launch sites. In recent weeks, however, they have targeted bridges, railroads, port facilities and energy infrastructure.

History reveals that this evolution is not unusual. In conflicts from Vietnam to Iraq, Kosovo to Ukraine, political and military leaders often expect — and sometimes promise — a short campaign. When initial strikes fail to achieve their goals, political leaders double down on the idea that imposing massive economic costs and civilian hardship will force adversaries to bend the knee.

In fact, expanding the target list often increases humanitarian costs while failing to produce the desired results.

In attacking Iranian infrastructure, the Trump administration apparently hopes to degrade Iran’s ability to threaten shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and increase pressure on Iran’s leaders to meet U.S. settlement demands. But as Robert Pape and other experts on the use of air power have shown, bombing alone rarely compels capitulation. Instead, attacks that inflict widespread civilian suffering often strengthen national resolve, as Britain’s response to the Blitz, North Vietnam’s endurance during Operation Rolling Thunder, and Ukraine’s response to Russia’s attacks on its electrical grid all illustrate.

During the 1991 Gulf War, coalition forces attacked Iraq’s electrical grid, bridges and transportation networks, oil facilities and defense industries. Although most of these installations supported Iraq’s military, their destruction also crippled food systems, hospitals, water treatment........

© The Hill