Two months after the United States and Israel launched a joint surprise attack on Iran, negotiations appear to have stalled, with the world’s energy supplies continuing to be disrupted by the conflicting blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and the future of Iran’s nuclear program remaining unresolved.
In a sign of continued conflict, White House press secretary Anna Kelly said on Tuesday, a day after President Donald Trump and his senior national security advisers discussed Iran’s new proposal to resolve the war, that the United States was still negotiating with Iran but was “not rushing into a bad deal.”
Recommended stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Despite a ceasefire in the conflict that has been in effect since April 8, all military options remain on the table. Qatar’s Foreign Ministry on Tuesday warned of the possibility of a “frozen conflict” in which the vital waterway could be used as a pressure card amid a possible flare-up of violence.
The US president envisions the possibility of suspending military operations against Tehran, while leaving open the option of carrying out targeted attacks if necessary.
Analysts say low-intensity conflict, punctuated by periodic strikes, is a convenient workaround, prolonging regional instability and global economic turmoil in the absence of a durable agreement in which both sides can claim victory.
The cost of a “frozen” war
While the war between the United States and Iran can already be described as “frozen,” this no-war, no-deal scenario would come at too high a cost for both sides, Mehran Kamraba, an Iran expert at Georgetown University in Qatar, told Al Jazeera.
“Iran cannot afford to have its ports blocked indefinitely, and the United States cannot continue to blockade Iran indefinitely,” Kamrava said. “While the conflict may be frozen in the short term for the time being, this is unlikely to last for months or even years.”
The Quincy Institute, an American foreign policy think tank, estimated that the war cost Washington between $20 billion and $25 billion in the first month of the war. A large-scale ground operation in Iran similar to the 2003 Iraq operation would require at least 500,000 personnel and about $55 billion a month, or more than $650 billion a year, but think tanks warn that this remains a significant underestimate.
Therefore, while a continuation of the status quo would have economic benefits in the short term, escalating the conflict without a clear conclusion would be costly for the United States both economically and politically.
The US military has imposed a naval blockade of Iranian ports and ships since April 13. Last week, the U.S. military dispatched the 3rd Carrier Strike Group, which includes thousands of elite troops, in the largest buildup since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. It is estimated that more than 10,000 US troops are deployed to the region.
Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz to non-paying vessels has also affected the United States, with the average price of gasoline at the pump nearing $4.18 a gallon ($1.10 a litre), the highest level in nearly four years. This was conducted ahead of the midterm elections in November, and according to opinion polls, President Trump’s approval rating remains at a low level of 34%, compared to 47% when he was inaugurated for a second term in January 2025.
The Iranian attack has also caused billions of dollars in damage to U.S. military assets in the region, testing relations between Washington and its Gulf allies, which have seen major industrial and energy facilities come under Iranian attack and a reputation as a safe haven for war-scarred businesses.
Kamrava said the U.S. economy would be able to absorb the economic shock from the war. “Whether the U.S. political system can tolerate that is another question,” he added.
Protracted conflicts and protracted conflicts
President Trump’s initial forecast was for the Iran war to last “four to five weeks.” Two months into the conflict, Chandler Williams, a researcher at the Peace Research Institute Oslo (PRIO), said the protracted conflict was lasting longer than expected.
“When states and governments rely heavily on precision air power, the lack of authorization for out-of-committee action often leads to escalation rather than resolution, and that’s what we’re seeing now,” Williams said.
Protracted conflicts are usually the result of miscalculation, whereas protracted conflicts are deliberately provoked. “The question now is whether this protracted conflict will be prolonged,” he added.
Williams said the United States is betting on continued economic and diplomatic pressure, backed by President Trump’s persistent threats to resume airstrikes, to see if “we can finish what airstrikes alone cannot accomplish.”
Iran, recognizing the military superiority of the United States, has chosen to utilize the Strait of Hormuz until the United States determines that a negotiated solution is preferable. “Iran is betting that the United States will not escalate further, but a truly protracted conflict would be difficult to sustain in the long term,” he said.
A United Nations Development Program (UNDP) report earlier this month found that the military expansion is impacting jobs and livelihoods in Iran through disruptions to economic activity, movement and supply chains.
Much of Iran’s grain imports pass through the Strait of Hormuz, an important global shipping route for Tehran. UNDP said transport disruptions around the Straits have raised concerns about delays in grain shipments, tightening domestic supplies and increasing the risk of food insecurity in the country of 90 million people.
“In the case of Iran, the key calculation is whether it can withstand the cost of shutting down a significant part of the global economy and whether that will help it get a better deal at the negotiating table,” Williams said.
“Mowing” in Iran
On Tuesday, the U.S. Department of Defense requested $53.6 billion for autonomous drones in fiscal year 2027, an increase of about 24,000 percent from last year.
Michael Kerr, a historian and political scientist at King’s College London, told Al Jazeera: “When conflict tactics shift to drone warfare and low-intensity conflict, as we saw in the Ukraine-Russia conflict, the costs are lower for the attacker, but the consequences for the victim are higher.”
Israel, an ally of the United States, has employed a strategy of attrition in its years-long conflicts with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The irreconcilable positions of both sides led to a nominal cease-fire agreement, which did little to curb military escalation.
Israel has often described its strategy of alternating periods of peace with occasional large-scale military operations as “mowing the grass.” The United States could choose the same approach toward Iran, leaving the region highly unstable and dashing Gulf states’ aspirations for renewed stability and economic prosperity.
The risks of using this tactic against a state actor with Iran’s drone and missile capabilities are substantial, Carr said. “If we mow the grass (against Iran), we won’t be able to stop Iran from attacking Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait and launching drones at U.S. ships every time,” he said.
Iran, the second largest country in the Middle East, has great strategic importance due to its strategic location in the Gulf of Oman and the Sea of Oman. Kerr said Western hopes that regional and global ambitions could be “bombed back” were doomed to failure.
“The idea that you can bomb Iran to accept Israeli regional hegemony through U.S. bombing is never going to work.”
