March 13, 2026
KUALA LUMPUR – The world witnessed a military operation that redefined modern warfare.
President Donald Trump authorised an AI-led decapitation strike against Iran’s top leadership, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and key members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
This strike marked the first instance in military history where AI played the starring role in eliminating an adversary’s command structure. It was a brilliant feat—a testament to American technological prowess that left global leaders in awe.
But as the dust settles, a sobering reality emerges. U.S. strike may have won a battle, but it risks losing the war. Iran could very well become another Vietnam for the United States—a quagmire of attrition that drains resources, erodes public support, and exposes the limits of American power.
The parallels to Vietnam are stark and unsettling. In the 1960s and 1970s, the U.S. entered Southeast Asia with overwhelming military superiority, confident that superior firepower and technology would crush a determined but outgunned foe.
Yet, the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese forces turned the conflict into a war of attrition, bleeding American forces through guerrilla tactics, protracted engagements, and sheer resilience.
Similarly, Iran’s response to the decapitation strike has been anything but capitulation. Scattered IRGC units have regrouped under mid-level commanders, launching asymmetric counterattacks across the region. Reports from the ground indicate a surge in militia mobilisations, with Iranian proxies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen activating sleeper cells. Hezbollah, Iran’s most potent ally, has already fired rockets into Israel, escalating tensions on multiple fronts.
This escalation threatens to spread the conflict across the entire Gulf region, transforming a targeted strike into a regional conflagration.
The Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world’s oil passes, has become a flashpoint. Iranian forces, invoking their right to self-defense, have mined sections of the strait and deployed fast-attack boats to harass shipping lanes.
In a bold move reminiscent of the 1980s Tanker War, Iran has threatened to block the strait entirely if U.S. naval forces approach too closely. Such a blockade would cripple global oil supplies, sending prices skyrocketing.
Brent crude has already jumped per barrel in the weeks following the strike, with analysts predicting a big surge if disruptions persist.
The Middle East’s oil-dependent economies—Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others—could face economic collapse, potentially drawing them into the fray as reluctant U.S. allies or opportunistic adversaries.
At the heart of Iran’s defiance is a deep-seated national pride rooted in millennia of history.
As Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian stated, “Iran is a civilisation of 3,000 years. We will never surrender to a nation barely 250 years old.”
This sentiment resonates across Iran’s 90 million people, a population larger than Vietnam’s during the U.S. war there. Iran’s society is battle-hardened, having endured the eight-year Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, which claimed over a million lives yet failed to break the nation’s spirit.
With a vast network of underground bunkers, missile silos, and a homegrown arms industry, Iran is equipped for a prolonged conflict. Its strategy appears clear: draw the U.S. into a ground war, where American advantages in air and AI superiority give way to the brutal realities of urban combat and insurgency.
In contrast, the United States faces severe constraints. President Trump, now in his second term, operates under the shadow of the 2026 midterm elections. With Republicans holding slim majorities in Congress, a drawn-out war could prove politically toxic. Trump’s base may cheer the initial strike, but sustaining a conflict amid rising casualties and costs is another matter.
The Pentagon has already warned of munitions depletion; the U.S. arsenal, optimised for short, high-intensity operations, is ill-prepared for attrition. Precision-guided missiles, like those used in the decapitation, cost upwards of $1 million each, and production lines strained by ongoing support for Ukraine and Israel cannot keep pace with Iran’s swarming tactics. Drones and rockets from Iranian factories, cheaper and more plentiful, could force the U.S. to burn through stockpiles at an unsustainable rate.
History’s lesson from Vietnam is clear: Uncle Sam underestimated its adversary and overestimated itself.
In Vietnam, the U.S. deployed half a million troops, dropped more bombs than in World War II, and still withdrew in humiliation after 58,000 American deaths and trillions in today’s dollars. The North Vietnamese, with their unyielding will and knowledge of the terrain, outlasted American resolve. Today, Iran benefits from similar asymmetries. Its mountainous geography favors defensive warfare, while its alliances with Russia provide covert resupply channels. Moscow, eager to distract the U.S. from Ukraine, has already pledged advanced anti-air systems to Tehran.
Time is not on the White House’s side. As the conflict drags on, American public impatience will mount. Polls conducted in the immediate aftermath of the strike reveal a divided nation: a CNN survey shows only 41% approval for the operation, with 59% opposing escalation into a full war. Memories of Iraq and Afghanistan—endless wars that cost over $8 trillion and achieved little—loom large. The American people are in no mood for another foreign entanglement.
Rising gas, already averaging $3.32 per gallon nationwide, are fueling discontent. In swing states like Pennsylvania and Michigan, where energy costs hit hardest, voters are voicing fury. “We can’t afford this,” said one Detroit autoworker in a recent focus group. “Gas is killing my budget, and for what? Another mess in the Middle East?”
This economic burden underscores a broader truth: Americans don’t need another Vietnam. They need a more affordable life, which remains elusive for the majority. The latest unemployment rate has been going up, as Wall Street Journal reported, more than 92,000 jobs lost in February. Wages have stagnated relative to inflation, housing costs have soared, and healthcare remains a patchwork of inequities. The war’s ripple effects—higher fuel prices inflating everything from groceries to airfares—exacerbate these struggles.
A heated war with Iran would be disastrous for Republicans, potentially flipping the House and Senate in November 2026. Trump’s approval ratings, hovering at less than 35%, could plummet more if body bags start returning home. Democratic challengers are already campaigning on an anti-war platform, invoking the ghosts of past failures. “This isn’t strength; it’s recklessness,” declared Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer in a fiery speech.
To avoid this fate, the U.S. must pivot from military bravado to diplomatic pragmatism. The decapitation strike, while tactically brilliant, has created a power vacuum that radical elements could fill, much like the post-Saddam chaos in Iraq. Engaging regional powers—Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and even China—in mediated talks could de-escalate tensions.
In the end, Iran’s potential as another Vietnam serves as a cautionary tale. The U.S. strike showcased AI’s transformative power in warfare, but victory demands more than technological edge—it requires strategic foresight, public endurance, and an understanding of history’s unforgiving lessons.
L.P. Yau is the Chief Editor, Yazhou Zhoukan, Asia Weekly based in Hong Kong.