Escalating tensions in the Middle East are entering a more volatile phase as strikes on critical energy infrastructure prompt new warnings from President Donald Trump and raise questions about the trajectory of the ongoing campaign against Iran.
Brian Carter, a fellow with the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute, said the latest developments underscore both the progress made against Iran’s military capabilities and the persistent risks that remain.
The immediate flashpoint centers on attacks involving the South Pars gas field in Iran and a related strike affecting Qatar’s liquefied natural gas infrastructure, one of the most important energy hubs in the world. The exchange has heightened concerns about global energy markets and introduced a new layer of strategic complexity to the conflict.
Trump responded with a forceful warning, signaling that further Iranian attacks on energy facilities could trigger a massive U.S. response, including the potential destruction of key Iranian energy assets. At the same time, he emphasized a reluctance to target such infrastructure, citing long-term consequences for Iran’s future and the broader region.
Carter said the strikes must be understood within the broader context of efforts to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping lane that has been disrupted during the conflict. He described Israeli actions against Iranian targets as part of a strategy to reestablish deterrence and restore freedom of navigation, rather than a shift toward a full-scale campaign against Iran’s economic base.
Despite reports from U.S. officials that Iran’s naval and air capabilities have been significantly degraded, the recent strike on Qatar illustrates the limits of those gains. Carter noted that even a weakened adversary can still inflict strategic damage, particularly when using missiles or drones against vulnerable infrastructure.
“It only takes a small number of successful strikes to create a major political and economic impact,” he said, pointing to the inherent difficulty of achieving perfect defense against such attacks.
Assessments from U.S. defense officials have highlighted what they describe as operational progress, including reductions in missile and drone activity and targeted efforts to neutralize threats to maritime traffic. However, Carter cautioned against declaring outright success at this stage, arguing that the campaign should be viewed as ongoing rather than complete.
He emphasized that military operations of this scale typically require more time than initial expectations suggest, and that evaluating progress rather than seeking rapid conclusions may provide a more accurate picture of the situation.
Questions also remain about the internal stability of the Iranian regime. While some indicators suggest strain within Iran’s security apparatus, Carter said it would be premature to describe the government as nearing collapse. He pointed to reports of internal security forces altering their behavior in response to targeted strikes, including relocating checkpoints and avoiding exposure, as signs of pressure rather than disintegration.
“There are early indicators of stress within the system, but the regime still maintains control on the ground,” Carter said.
Efforts to further weaken Iran’s internal security structure are continuing, with some analysts suggesting that targeting key assets such as weapons depots could accelerate the erosion of regime control. Carter acknowledged that such strategies could play a role but stressed that meaningful change would likely require sustained pressure over time.
Regional dynamics add another layer of complexity. Gulf states, including Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, have been directly affected by recent attacks but appear to remain broadly aligned with U.S. and Israeli objectives. Carter noted that these countries recognize the threat posed by Iran, even as they express concern over actions that could escalate the conflict further.
The decision to avoid widespread strikes on energy infrastructure reflects a balancing act between immediate military objectives and long-term strategic considerations. Carter pointed to past conflicts, including Iraq, as examples of how damage to energy systems can have lasting consequences that complicate post-conflict recovery.
As the campaign continues, the timeline for achieving stated objectives remains uncertain. While early expectations suggested a relatively short duration, Carter said it is difficult to predict when conditions will allow for a clear declaration of success.
He identified the Strait of Hormuz as the central issue that will likely shape future decisions. Ensuring that Iran cannot use the waterway as leverage against the United States or its allies is, in his view, a critical objective that may extend the timeline of the conflict.
“The key question is whether Iran can continue to threaten shipping in the Strait and use that as a tool of coercion,” Carter said. “If that capability remains, it will influence how and when the United States chooses to step back.”
As policymakers weigh next steps, the evolving situation highlights the challenges of balancing military pressure, economic stability, and long-term regional strategy in a conflict with far-reaching implications.