Soft Words, Big Sticks, and an Endgame in Iran

President Donald Trump on Monday, July 13, doubled down on his continuing war of attrition against Iran, suggesting that – as well as the ongoing strikes – a “major attack” is coming. After CENTCOM announced that it had struck multiple targets yesterday, the commander-in-chief followed with a statement reiterating the immense damage already done to the Tehran regime – and hinted strongly at what was to come.

Pickaxe Mountain Strikes?

Speaking with radio host Hugh Hewitt, the president explained that the US was already closely monitoring nuclear development sites within Iran. Specifically discussing Pickaxe Mountain, he said:

“They don’t have it because we have eyes, you know, with the … with Space Force and everything else, we have a lot of eyes on it. But Pickaxe is possible, you know, a possible target for a nice, big, fat shot right in the front door.”

“No, it is on the list,” Trump continued. “We’re watching it closely. We see no activity there. They’re not doing well with their nuclear situation. Every time we hear about it, we blow it up, so they don’t like talking about it. But we’ll probably give Pickaxe a shot relatively soon.”

The president also floated the idea of being reimbursed for protecting shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, an idea that went down like a lead balloon in both conservative and liberal circles. “I want to be reimbursed because we’re protecting a very rich portion of the world,” he argued.

But what is the overall game plan for ending the conflict?

Anaconda Strategy in Iran

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich posited that the current offensive was akin to that of Abraham Lincoln’s Civil War-era “Anaconda” strategy, making the case that the US military is slowly applying gradual pressure on Tehran while trying to avoid a significant ground war. He said:

“This may strike you as a strange analogy, but when Abraham Lincoln became president and the South seceded, the senior general outlined for him what he called an anaconda strategy, that they would gradually surround and crush the rebellion.”

He continued, “Well, if you watch week after week, our allies are getting madder at Iran, not at us. The Iranians are gradually losing power and capability. We are coercing them.” This appears to be an accurate summation. After all, if the president is to be believed – and no one has really made a case to debunk him on this – the Iranian navy, air force, and missile manufacturing capability have been largely destroyed.

So, Gingrich is not entirely wrong in making the “anaconda” connection, although the pressure on the president from Congress appears to follow a similar protocol.

Is Dealmaking Still on the Table?

Against all odds, Tehran’s leadership seems to believe it maintains the upper hand in negotiations. Why else would it continue its own strikes against vessels in the strait? Either the regime believes it can draw out the whole conflict at a low-resolution level until Trump leaves office in 2029, or it thinks it can agree to terms (as in the much vaunted but ultimately failed memorandum of understanding) and then just ignore them. Iran has a history of making deals it has no intention of abiding by.

President Trump thinks he can be the one who finally gets Iran to act honestly. “The difference is nobody negotiated like I do. And this should have been done by Bush and Obama and Biden and people before them,” he said. But while Tehran still believes it has a fighting chance, any deal will likely not be worth the paper it is written on.

As President Theodore Roosevelt once remarked, “Speak softly and carry a big stick—you will go far.” It seems Donald Trump has decided that the time for speaking – softly or otherwise – is at an end.