Trump began his second term with the promise that he would end wars rather than start new ones. He had already envisioned winning the Nobel Peace Prize for himself. However, things have changed dramatically. After the relatively ‘soft’ – though still illegal, military intervention in Venezuela he subsequently launched, together with Israel, a full-scale attack on Iran. As Robert Malley and Stephen Wertheim wrote (The New York Times - International Edition - March 7/8): “President Trump’s attack on Iran is astonishing in its audacity, aggression and lawlessness (...) The self-appointed president of peace has turned into an embolden warmaker.” The renaming of the Department of Defense as ‘Department of War’ already signaled the new direction of U.S. foreign policy under Donald Trump. And War Secretary Pete Hegseth further underlined this shift in mindset: “The dumb, politically correct wars of the past were the opposite of what we are doing here”. 

President Trump has demanded the “unconditional surrender” of Iran. At the same time, he has claimed that the war would be over within four—and later six—weeks. Republican Senator Tommy Tuberville added that the “conflict should be very short and sweet”. The President later even referred to the war in Iran as a “short-term excursion”. A complete regime change through an air campaign alone appears unlikely, given Iran’s deeply entrenched political structures. A genuine revolution that does not leave at least parts of the old system intact would require far more than a simple reorganization of the administrative apparatus or the replacement of one group of rulers by another faction from the old elite.

Seit dem 28. Dezember 2025 gehen im Iran wieder Menschen zu Tausenden auf die Straße. Diesmal nicht als Reaktion auf einen einzelnen Todesfall wie 2022. Diesmal aus einer akkumulierten Erschöpfung heraus: wirtschaftlicher Kollaps, politische Hoffnungslosigkeit, und das Wissen, dass das Regime seit dem zwölftägigen Krieg mit Israel im Sommer 2025 regional geschwächt ist wie nie zuvor.

Das Regime reagiert auf diese äußere Schwäche mit verstärkter innerer Gewalt – ein Muster, das wir historisch immer wieder beobachten können: Wer nach außen verliert, kompensiert nach innen.