The Iran war’s muddled endgame

TEL AVIV – The U.S.-Israeli war on Iran flagrantly violates international law. But so has nearly every other war since the adoption in 1945 of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits the use of force except in self-defense or, as in the cases of the Korean War (1950-53) and the First Gulf War (1990-91), with Security Council authorization. Where the current Iran war stands out is not in its illegality, but rather in its lack of any clear or achievable objective. In the United States, officials have oscillated between emphasizing regime change and suggesting that the operation will be limited to the targeted destruction of nuclear and ballistic-missile facilities, as well as Iran’s navy. President Donald Trump, for his part, has called for unconditional surrender, insisting that Iran install “acceptable” new leadership. But he has also claimed that the U.S. has already “won in many ways” in Iran – just not “enough.” Trump clearly wants to avoid a prolonged military engagement, which would erode support among his isolationist MAGA base. In the meantime, he needs to