The Illusion of Precision Control
As the U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran enter their second week, President Donald Trump's goals for the war remain shrouded in uncertainty. Announcing the beginning of Operation Epic Fury on February 28, 2026, Trump framed the war as necessary to stop Iran from attaining nuclear weapons, yet he also hinted at a regime change, urging Iranians to "take back your country." Days later, he redefined the objective as destroying Iran's ballistic missile capabilities, navy, and stopping its support for proxy groups, with a broader goal of protecting the U.S. and its allies from attacks.
Analysts have warned that Trump's ambitious aims in Iran—a nation of more than 90 million—may be impossible to achieve with airpower alone. Robert Pape, Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, an expert on the use of airpower and author of "Bombing to Win: Air Power and Coercion in War," emphasizes that history is not on Trump's side.
No Historical Precedent for Regime Change
Pape notes that for over a century, states have tried to topple regimes with airpower alone, only to face consistent failure. "For over a century, states—including the United States, European states, Russia, and Israel—have tried to topple regimes with air power alone. It has never—and I'm choosing my words carefully—it has never worked."
He argues that airpower can lead to either a slightly modified version of the current regime or a more radical regime change, which often takes the form of a younger, more aggressive generation taking over. This can result in catastrophic costs for the attacker. "When you get a more radical regime change, this is usually because a much younger generation, more vigorous, more willing to take aggressive risks, takes over."
The Escalation Trap
Pape warns that leaders often fall into the escalation trap, where supreme confidence in tactical success leads to not taking seriously that the enemy will become more nationalist, more aggressive as a result of the attack. He calls this the "smart bomb trap," where false strategic optimism with precision airpower leads to strategic failure. "Tactical perfection does not automatically lead to strategic success and overconfidence that it does is the trap that leads to the opposite—strategic failure."
Indiscriminate Bombing in Urban Areas
Pape highlights that even when using precision-guided bombs, the blast radius can be significant, knocking down buildings next to the target and sometimes for half a block or more. This can make it difficult to distinguish precision from indiscriminate bombing, especially in urban areas. "For civilians, they often can't tell the difference and do not care whether the building that falls on them or their families was the 'target' or collateral damage."
A Lasting Legacy of Slaughter
Pape notes that after the bombing stops, people in the streets of Iran will likely not be motivated to challenge the regime, as the illusions of precision control can lead to harsh realities. He points to the example of President George H.W. Bush's encouragement of Shia protesters in Iraq in 1991, which was met with a brutal response from Saddam Hussein's regime. "Even with our army just on the other side of the border in Kuwait, the cavalry could not arrive in time."
The limits of airpower in achieving regime change, combined with the risks of escalation and the potential for indiscriminate bombing, leave many questions unanswered about the U.S.-Israeli strikes against Iran. As Pape emphasizes, history suggests that the illusion of precision control can lead to strategic failure, and it remains to be seen whether Trump's ambitious aims will be achievable in the face of such challenges."
