Sign up with Google
Sign in with Zoho
While there are calls coming from some corners of Washington attempting to persuade the US President to invade Iran by sending ground forces the first one to invite such an action would be Iran itself. The Iranian military particularly the IRGC and other paramilitary groups such as the Basij would love to welcome the American soldiers on what they would certainly describe as ‘ Hell’. And it would be hell for the US won’t only be fighting the Iranian army but also other armed guerrilla militias well trained and prepared for this very scenario . It would be the “perfect trap” that the Tehran would be wishing the Washington would fall into.
In order to decipher why resorting to such a course of action could be disastrous for the United States one just needs to have a look at American military history since the end of Second World War. Ground invasion of foreign nations have resulted in what could best be described as “forever wars” leading to thousands of American casualties and more importantly a loss of face and moral legitimacy for Washington. The answer as to why US forces often fail on these “ foreign adventures” could be simply understood if one takes the trouble in looking at the world map and its intricate details.
The US doesn’t lose because the adversary is more stronger or smarter. Nor because its own resilience or skills are weaker. It gets defeated by something more fundamental than military logic. It loses to geography. The US forces walk into a terrain that the enemy knows only too well. This pattern can be observed from the US military failures ranging from Vietnam in 1960-70 to Afghanistan in 2001-2021.
In Vietnam the American forces lost to the dense jungles which the Viet cong knew far better than US troops. In Afghanistan the mountains and hostile terrain got the better of America. This is not to say that it is only geography that helps win the opponent against an invading force. But Washington’s enemies also know how to best make use of that geography. Combine that with efficient weapons, training, motivation and a high pain threshold the US ends up facing a very potent and capable adversary than what appears on paper to military planners sitting in Washington.
Look at Iran. Like Afghanistan Iran is big country full of mountains and deserts which acts as its natural shield against the enemy. The ancient Persian nation had throughout its history been difficult to subdue or conquer. Iran can afford to lose thousands of kilometres of its own territory before US forces could reach its capital. That itself could require weeks of fighting in unknown terrain and could lead to hundreds of casualties among American troops. The territory is likely to swallow the US rather than the other way round.
The Iranian military and paramilitary is well versed with urban warfare. The US will be fighting Iran in Iranian streets and cities. This could be a house to house fight stretching the duration of the war from weeks to months and then months to years. Another forever war.
The US also does not have enough intelligence information about the mindset of ordinary Iranians. Will they rise in revolt against the regime and welcome the American troops as liberators? Well that is what the US thought its air and naval bombing campaign of Iran would do. Nothing of that sort happened. Instead one saw millions of Iranians throng streets during the funeral of the their supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. This shows that there is no unity in opposition to the current regime. Moreover any American ground invasion would serve enough justification for Iranian clergy and armed groups like IRGC to get the people to “rally around the flag” against the invaders. In such a scenario the US won’t just be fighting the Iranian forces but also a hostile population.
Every increase in American casualty would make the war immensely unpopular at home. Similarly increasing Iranian civilian casualties would make the war unpopular abroad among US allies. And this is exactly the situation the US President would want to avoid especially at a time when mid term elections are approaching. The American President came into office the second time around with a promise to settle existing conflicts and not start new ones. He will do well not drag his country into something he or even his successors might find difficult in getting out of.
