- President Trump's approach to Iran risks misjudging the complex challenge compared to Venezuela
- Iran has a broad network of regional allies and proxies capable of multi-front responses
- Iran's military focuses on asymmetric warfare with missiles, drones, and cyber capabilities
When it comes to projecting American power abroad, President Donald Trump has often relied on pressure, speed and spectacle. But if Washington believes Iran can be handled the way it dealt with the Venezuelan leadership, it may be misreading the scale of the challenge. In Venezuela, Washington faced a country hollowed out by years of economic collapse, sanctions and political isolation. Its armed forces were underfunded, its institutions brittle and its international alliances limited. Even at the height of tensions with Caracas, the United States calculated that pressure - diplomatic, economic and covert - would likely yield results without triggering a regional war.
Also Read | Iran Enters Survival Mode After Assassination Of Supreme Leader Khamenei
Iran presents a different order of challenge. Its supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei may be dead, but the system created over the decades by those in power will not disintegrate easily.
Let's look at reasons why Iran, already weakened with its power at one of its lowest ebbs, is diminished but not outrightly defeated. First, the Islamic Republic is not isolated in the same way. It has spent decades building a network of regional allies and proxies stretching from Iraq to Lebanon (Hezbollah) and Yemen (Houthis) - a collective dubbed by Iran as "the Axis of Resistance". Groups aligned with Tehran have battlefield experience and the capacity to strike US interests and partners across the Middle East. Any move against Iran risks a multi-front response, not a contained confrontation.
A protester stands near fire while approaching US embassy in Baghdad
Second, Iran's military capabilities are more formidable. While it cannot match US conventional power, it has invested heavily in asymmetric warfare: ballistic missiles, drones, naval mines and cyber operations. Its ability to disrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz - through which a significant share of the world's oil passes - gives it leverage that Venezuela never possessed.
Third, geography matters. Iran is vast, mountainous and home to more than 85 million people. Any attempt at regime change or occupation would be vastly more complex than operations in smaller, more economically fragile states. Urban warfare in cities such as Tehran would carry high civilian and political costs.
There is also the ideological dimension. Since the 1979 revolution, Iran's leadership has framed resistance to the United States as central to its identity. External pressure often strengthens hardliners rather than weakening them. Nationalism, even among government critics, can surge in the face of foreign attack.
Explosion following a strike in Tehran. (AFP)
Finally, the global stakes are higher. A confrontation with Iran would not be a bilateral affair. Russia and China maintain ties with Tehran. European powers, wary after decades of Middle East conflict, would be cautious about endorsing escalation. Energy markets would react instantly. And unlike Venezuela, Iran has sustained an active nuclear programme.
A New York Times report said that Trump is counting on a scenario that Iranians will overthrow their own "unpopular" government. But there are multiple scenarios that could unfold, with one of the journalists saying, "They have unleashed forces here that they cannot control".
For Trump, the lesson is clear: What worked against a beleaguered Venezuelan leadership cannot simply be replicated in Iran. The risks are broader, the battlefield more complex and the consequences far less predictable.
