Up the Eascalation Ladder
On 16 July 2026, I was on Danny Haiphong’s popular podcast talking mainly about the Iran war but also the conflict in Ukraine. It is clear that the tit-for-tat strikes between Iran and the US are escalating — dangerously so — and that President Trump apparently believes he can best the Iranians as he marches up the escalation ladder. I explained in detail to Danny why this is not true and why the US is destined to lose this war. Trump would have been much better off sticking to the Memorandum of Understanding that he signed on 17 June 2026, rather than violating it and trying to get a better deal.
Spot on, Professor. This is a classic demonstration of the limits of conventional deterrence when applied to asymmetric geography.
We are essentially watching a modernized replay of the 1980s Tanker War playbook, but with exponentially higher stakes. By targeting critical regional infrastructure and global energy links, Tehran isn't trying to match US conventional naval power; they are exploiting the fact that Washington is deeply constrained by global economic vulnerability.
The Western strategy assumes that moving up the escalation ladder will force a rational retreat, completely miscalculating an adversary whose entire doctrine is built to leverage regional chaos.
It is a textbook escalation trap—the harder the hammer hits, the more the anvil breaks the surrounding framework.
Up the escalation ladder, deeper into the quagmire. Deeper into the quagmire, closer to civil disorder on the home front.