EGEGazette
Live
Report: Hurricane Polo hits Mexico: strong winds and flooding in Baja California SurReport: Russians strike school in Sumy with children sheltering inside — mediaReport: Hurricane Polo makes landfall on Mexico's Pacific coast, heads toward SonoraReport: Red alert in Catalonia: torrential rain floods the Penedès and cuts off metro and roads in BarcelonaIn brief: Myanmar: military air strike on market kills at least 50, humanitarian sources sayReport: Vessel struck by suspected projectile in Strait of HormuzReport: Fire breaks out on vessel hit by projectile in Strait of Hormuz: UK maritime agencyEthiopian Army Announces Control of Alamata Town in Tigray RegionStrong Explosions in Kyiv After Russian Ballistic Missile StrikesIn brief: Ethiopia: fighting intensifies between the TPLF and the federal army in TigrayMyanmar rebels report 49 killed in government troop strikesReport: Ethiopian army clashes with rebel alliance across multiple fronts
WorldReported

Analyst says Trump likely to 'declare victory and go home' on Iran, drawing parallels to 1979

War correspondent and author Scott Anderson says Washington's approach to Iran in 2026 echoes its historical misjudgments of the country, dating back to the Iranian revolution.

· 2 min read · language: en
Article image
— France 24 — English

The United States' approach toward Iran risks repeating past misjudgments, according to journalist and author Scott Anderson, who discussed the topic in an interview on France 24's Spotlight programme with host François Picard.

Anderson, a war correspondent and author of 'King of Kings: The Fall of the Shah and the Revolution That Forged Modern Iran,' argued that there is a striking parallel between the United States' handling of Iran in 1979 and its approach in 2026, suggesting a persistent pattern of Washington misreading the country and its internal dynamics.

According to Anderson, the likely outcome of the current US posture toward Iran is that President Donald Trump will 'declare victory and go home,' a phrase he used to describe what he characterised as the 'Greenland option' — an approach in which the United States claims a favourable outcome and withdraws attention from the situation without deeper, sustained engagement with the underlying issues.

Anderson's book examines the 1979 Iranian revolution and the fall of the Shah, tracing the historical roots of the fraught relationship between Washington and Tehran that has persisted for decades. His comments suggest he sees echoes of that earlier period of miscalculation in current US policy toward Iran.

The discussion comes amid continued tension between the United States and Iran, with Anderson's analysis pointing to a broader pattern in which American policymakers, in his view, have struggled to accurately assess Iranian politics and society across multiple administrations.

Anderson's remarks reflect his own analysis and interpretation as a longtime observer of the region, offered in the context of a televised interview rather than as an official US or Iranian government position.

Sources

EGazette summarizes reporting from multiple sources; follow the links for the originals.

Comments

Sign in to join the conversation.

Forgot password?

No account?

Loading comments…

Related articles