Amid the third month of war in the Middle East, the lingering scent of strategic deadlocks prevails. Donald Trump, who promised to settle Iran’s fate in a few weeks with martial threats, now finds himself trapped in a precarious situation: neither openly at war nor negotiating peace. This gray area profoundly instills geopolitical uncertainty and threatens fragile economies.
The blustery posture has crumbled. It shatters against the reality of an Iranian regime once perceived as weakened, shaken by the January protests and their brutal suppression.
Contrary to expectations, the Islamic Republic stiffens, consolidates, and radicalizes. The Revolutionary Guards have seized control, imposing a logic of confrontation in a country whose deep-seated qualities Washington clearly underestimated: military capabilities, strategic endurance, regional leverage. Moreover, the White House has revealed a dangerous oversight: forgetting that geography often dictates history. The Strait of Hormuz is not a mere detail, it is a key factor.
In the absence of tangible results – exemplified by the failure of discussions in Islamabad – the American administration is shifting blame elsewhere. European allies have become convenient scapegoats for a faltering strategy. Accused of timidity, publicly reprimanded, the French, British, and Italians were barely informed of the February 28 attack on Tehran. Such insensitivity erodes trust and shakes alliances built painstakingly since 1945.
Subsequently, a looming question arises: can a superpower become so invisible as to worry as much as a declared adversary? This query is no longer taboo in European capitals. Symbolic gestures may be necessary, such as King Charles III’s ceremonial visit to Washington on Monday, April 26, to restore some balance to a strained transatlantic relationship.
As consequences manifest, tangible daily repercussions abound. In France, the surge in fuel prices catches up with the government, necessitating targeted assistance for 3 million low-income households and vulnerable professions. The era of massive checks is a thing of the past; room for maneuver has evaporated.
Amidst darkening economic signals – sluggish growth, hesitant consumption, fragile industrial production – a looming presidential campaign unfolds. This hasty war, propelled by unchecked populism, could alter the landscape come 2027. For simplistic promises lose their allure when reality starkly reminds us of its constraints.
Recent setbacks, such as Viktor Orbán’s defeat, perhaps signal a fatigue with thunderous certainties. In France, no politician or major corporate figure supports Trump anymore. As Hannah Arendt aptly noted, “Radicalism destroys relativity and, therefore, human relationships.” The lesson warrants reflection. Crises are not resolved through tweets; they require what Trump seems least capable of providing: patience.
