Anna Hartz
For decades, the United States has spent enormous amounts of money on its military.
The country has advanced weapons, global bases, and one of the strongest armies the world has ever seen. Yet many of America’s modern wars have ended without a clear victory. That question is now at the center of a new analysis written by former US ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder.
The problem is not military weakness
In an article published by POLITICO, Daalder argues that America’s problem is not military weakness. He believes the real issue is poor strategy and unclear political goals before wars begin, according to Ziare.
According to Daalder, the last major conflict the United States clearly won was the 1991 Gulf War. That operation forced Iraq out of Kuwait after Saddam Hussein’s invasion. The mission had a clear goal and ended once that goal was achieved.
Since then, things have looked very different.
The former ambassador points to Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the recent confrontation with Iran as examples of wars where Washington relied heavily on military force without fully deciding what success would actually look like.
He says American leaders often believe overwhelming military power will force enemies to surrender. In reality, many opponents simply continue fighting for years. Daalder notes that groups like the Taliban and the Vietcong survived despite facing a far stronger military opponent.
He also argues that the United States has moved away from the classic idea that war should serve political goals. Instead, Washington often launches military action first and searches for political solutions later.
Comparison to Bush
Daalder compares the decisions of former presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. The elder Bush limited the Gulf War to liberating Kuwait and avoided invading Baghdad. His son later invaded Iraq and removed Saddam Hussein from power. That decision led to years of violence, instability, and insurgency across the region.
The analysis also criticizes Donald Trump’s handling of tensions with Iran. Daalder says the administration combined military threats with unclear diplomatic planning and had no serious strategy for what would happen if pressure on Tehran failed.
In the end, Daalder believes America’s repeated problems in war come from political decisions rather than military capability. He says the country often enters conflicts without clearly defining goals, exit plans, or long-term consequences.
