What the US military could do if Iran fails to meet Trump’s ultimatum

Time is running out for Iran as President Donald Trump threatens to obliterate much of its civilian infrastructure by Tuesday evening. However, experts argue that the US military faces significant challenges in executing such an ambitious plan within a short timeframe. The urgency of the deadline has sparked debate about the feasibility of Trump’s warnings, with analysts suggesting that even a major assault may not compel Tehran to swiftly agree to a ceasefire.

Trump’s Monday vow to annihilate “every bridge” and power station in Iran in just four hours has intensified the pressure. On Tuesday, he escalated his rhetoric, warning that “a whole civilization will die” if Iran does not reach an agreement by his specified deadline. This marked a new level of threat from a US leader, according to observers. Yet, the ability to fulfill such a promise remains questionable.

Feasibility of the Threat

Experts caution that a full-scale strike on Iran’s infrastructure is not easily achievable. A former US defense official noted that “destroying every bridge in a nation the size of Iran in a few hours would be an absolute herculean task.” The country’s vast size makes it difficult to identify and neutralize thousands of targets swiftly.

Despite knowing the locations of key facilities like nuclear plants, the US struggles to pinpoint and strike all bridges across the country in such a short window. This has led to skepticism about whether the threat will have the intended strategic impact. “Trump is almost struggling to come up with a new level or threat that will move the strategic needle more in favor of the US here,” said the official, who requested anonymity.

Strategic Focus on Key Targets

Analysts suggest that a concentrated attack on Iran’s power sector is more realistic than a sweeping strike on every bridge. Most of Iran’s power plants and refineries are concentrated in three coastal provinces—Bushehr, Khuzestan, and Hormozgan—on the Persian Gulf. Targeting these areas could cripple the regime’s oil revenue and its access to critical maritime routes.

According to Miad Maleki, a former senior US Treasury official, striking these three provinces would “cut the regime’s access to oil revenue and the Persian Gulf and Strait of Hormuz.” This strategy aligns with the goal of inflicting economic pain without requiring an overwhelming military operation.

Recent Actions and Diplomatic Efforts

Vice-President JD Vance mentioned that the US had already struck military targets on Kharg Island, a vital location for Iran’s oil exports. However, he clarified that these actions did not signal a shift in Trump’s overall strategy. “Negotiations will continue until the deadline, but the US has tools ready to cause much greater pain to Iran’s economy,” Vance stated during a press briefing in Budapest.

The White House rejected claims that Vance’s comments implied a nuclear strike against Iran. Meanwhile, Iran’s state media reported that US-Israeli airstrikes had targeted a bridge in Qom. Last week, Trump had already claimed responsibility for bombing the country’s largest bridge, highlighting the intensity of the situation.

Despite recent direct communication between US and Iranian officials, significant gaps remain. The two sides are still far apart on major issues such as the future of Iran’s oil sector, its nuclear program, and control of the Strait of Hormuz. Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, along with Jared Kushner and Vance, is leading the talks, though an unnamed US official indicated that Witkoff and Kushner handle daily negotiations, while Vance is reserved for the final stages.