The war with Iran has reached a crisis for America’s economy and global standing.

As things currently stand, the United States has failed to compel Iran to end its nuclear weapons ambitions, its future missile and drone development support for terrorist groups, or obstruction of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

These are non-starters for Tehran, which has demanded war reparations, exit of U.S. military from the Middle East, and permanent control of the Strait of Hormuz to charge tolls.

Negotiations can’t bridge that gap.

Either the United States ultimately withdraws its forces — capitulates — or the hostilities resume and the United States seeks to knock out or cripple the regime in Tehran.

Minimally that would necessitate taking Kharg Island and Iran’s port facilities on the Gulf of Oman, landing forces in other critical areas to destroy its missile and drone-launching facilities and special operations to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program.

That will require much more than the 17,000 U.S. troops dispatched — 150,000 were sent to Iraq in March 2003.

The $200 billion in war funding proposed would be just a down payment. Unfortunately, federal finances are in a tougher spot nowadays with a 6% of GDP compared to 2003 when the budget gap was 3.3%.

However, the economic costs of ceding control of the Persian Gulf, Sea of Oman, Red Sea and Suez Canal would be much greater than the cost of prosecuting the war — if we spurred nation building.

It would be a long and costly battle financially for Americans, and other Gulf nations would likely sustain considerable additional damage to their petroleum and other industries.

Along with Israel, the Gulf Nations are running low on interceptor missiles, and our capacity to replenish those is limited.

To win, we would need a strong economy, political will among Americans to bear the human and financial burdens and more support from allies beyond use of bases in their territories and other logistics.

The president didn’t need public approval to start the war, but he should have explained his rationale for attacking Iran.

Americans don’t like the human or financial costs of conflict. But President Trump only gave Congress and the public the vaguest explanation of why he acted and didn’t articulate clear objectives or a realistic strategy.

He didn’t explain to Americans the threat posed by Iran, or adequately confer with Congress and allies — he later explained that he needed the element of surprise.

As early as two weeks into the campaign the peril posed by Iran to freedom of navigation, oil markets and energy security should have been obvious.

Yet, only 40% of Americans saw Iran as even a minor threat, and 15% viewed it as no threat at all. It then became obvious that troops on the ground would be necessary, but only 7% supported that.

Misadventures in Afghanistan and Vietnam bear a lot of that, but the stakes for America are too great if we cede the Gulf to Iran.

That would mark the end of America as a great power, creating a void for China to fill. The role of the dollar as the global currency would decline, which would constrain our ability to finance the U.S. debt and living standards.

China would be more likely to take Taiwan by force, and that’s where Nvidia’s chips —the guts of America’s competitive advantage —are manufactured.

Despite tariffs, deportations and the war, forecasters expect the resilient American economy to grow 2.0% this year.

If the war resumes or Iran continues to limit traffic through the Strait, those bets are likely off, because consumer spending is propped up by the wealthy and stock market.

Stock prices would experience additional volatility.

Ultimately, Trump must act decisively or cede victory to Tehran.

We should not try to replace the regime with a democratic order.

Many places in the Middle East are happy with monarchies if those deliver prosperity.

America has failed to rally domestic opposition to the Islamic Republic. Most opposition leaders have been eliminated or exiled for too many years.

Like many former empires, Iran’s borders were drawn arbitrarily as related to ethnic populations.

Perhaps 60% of the Iranian population is Persian. Large minorities, including the Kurds and Azerbaijanis, live adjacent to brethren in neighboring states.

It might be best to simply destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities, weapons-making capabilities and oil industry — export terminals, wells, the works — declare victory, leave the chaos to sort and let Iran fragment.

Not pretty, but even many of Iran’s neighbors want us to eliminate the current regime before we leave.

They likely understand that negotiations will not alter Tehran’s aggressive intensions.

History has come calling for Donald Trump.
_______________

Peter Morici is an economist and emeritus business professor at the University of Maryland, and a national columnist.