Washington's objective in Iran has moved, at least in rhetoric, from dismantling a nuclear program to collapsing a government's ability to function. At Camp David, President Donald Trump said the United States is prepared to "hit them very hard" until the regime reaches a point where it "can't go on anymore." What complicates that posture is a pattern of cancelled strikes, a Tehran that has learned to exploit American hesitation, and no credible transition plan waiting on the other side.
The strategic logic behind targeting infrastructure
Analyst Erfan Fard argues that the regime's real vulnerability is no longer its military facilities or nuclear sites. The electricity grid, oil refineries, fuel distribution networks, command-and-control systems, and communications infrastructure are the systems that keep the Islamic Republic operational. Disrupting those would weaken the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps's ability to coordinate nationwide operations and accelerate pressure on what Fard describes as an already bankrupt government. The Shiite clerical establishment has ruled for forty-eight years, using Iran, in Fard's phrase, as "a military garrison and an ammunition depot."
Tehran's leverage and Washington's credibility problem
Trump's repeated cancellations of planned large-scale strikes have raised questions about strategic coherence. Tehran, backed by Moscow and Beijing, has used that uncertainty. The regime's propaganda apparatus has threatened broad retaliation for any attacks on critical infrastructure, while simultaneously signaling readiness for a wider confrontation with the United States and Israel.
The case for diplomacy rests on the belief that enough pressure will bring Tehran back to the table. Fard rejects it. The Shiite clerical establishment's ideological rigidity, he argues, means the regime would rather see Iran devastated than abandon its revolutionary framework. Decades of negotiation have produced delay, not resolution.
The counterargument: collapse without a plan
The strongest objection to an infrastructure-targeting strategy is political, not military. If the Islamic Republic collapses without a credible post-regime structure in place, Iran risks falling into chaos. Fard names Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi as a potential leader of a transitional government and warns that remnants of the Islamic Republic could regroup through mosques and underground networks, preserving their ideology by other means. Tehran could also activate dormant terrorist cells in the United States and across the West, a capability the Islamic Republic has built over decades.
On balance
The read-through from Camp David is that Washington is prepared to escalate rhetorically but has not committed to a coherent end-state. Fard argues that closer coordination between the CIA and Mossad, alongside expanded covert support for opposition figures, would matter more than what he calls election-driven diplomacy. The line to watch is whether CENTCOM's targeting priorities shift from military facilities to the financial networks and command systems that sustain the IRGC. That shift, not the statements from Camp David, would signal a genuine change of strategy.