In a recent commentary, Kelly Grieco, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, assessed the effectiveness of U.S. military operations against Iran. President Trump claimed on the fourth that the military actions against Iran have been executed 'very well.' However, Grieco points out that relying solely on air power will not suffice for reorganizing Iran’s domestic politics. He specifically critiques the idea of a 'decapitation strike' aimed at eliminating Iran's Supreme Leader, stating there is little historical precedent for such a tactic leading to popular uprisings against a weakened regime.

Grieco emphasizes that while damage has certainly been inflicted on Iran’s nuclear and military facilities, the true extent of the damage remains largely unclear due to the deep underground locations of many of these facilities. The United States possesses the capability to strike these targets, yet accurately assessing the impact of such assaults is significantly complicated by the necessity of on-site evaluations. The analysis suggests that airstrikes can indeed destroy physical targets, but they do not have a direct correlation with the overthrow of a regime.

Drawing historical parallels, Grieco references the NATO bombing campaign in Kosovo in 1999, which, although it damaged Serbian military capabilities and infrastructure, did not result in the overthrow of Slobodan Milošević’s government. He notes that even if a regime is unpopular domestically, historical evidence indicates that military attacks often lead to a rallying effect among the attacked society against their aggressors. The commentary plays into a broader discussion about the implications of U.S. and Israeli actions against Iran and how these might affect geopolitical dynamics in the Middle East and beyond.