President Donald Trump (right) with Fred Fleitz who served as Chief of Staff and Executive Secretary of the National Security Council from May to October 2018. (©courtesy of Fred Fleitz)
Barely a day after it was declared, the temporary Iran cease-fire is showing signs of strain. On April 8, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said the agreed conditions had been violated, accusing Washington of failing to uphold its commitments.
As hostilities persist and global energy supplies remain under threat, what comes next?
To assess the possible trajectory, JAPAN Forward spoke with Fred Fleitz, former chief of staff of the US National Security Council under the first Trump administration and vice chair of the America First Policy Institute.
Tehran's Secret Mission
At the core of the US-Israeli strikes on Iran that began on February 28 remains a fundamental question: Was Iran an imminent threat?
For Fleitz, the answer cannot be separated from developments that unfolded in mid-March. On March 20, Iran launched medium-range ballistic missiles toward the US-UK military facility at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. Both failed to reach their target. But their significance, he says, lies in what they revealed.
Iran's attempted strike on a target roughly 4,000 kilometers away "proved Tehran was actually building missiles with far greater ranges capable of striking deep into Europe," the former Trump adviser said.
That demonstration, in his view, forces a reassessment of Iran's missile capabilities, which the regime has long claimed are regionally confined.
Fleitz points to its multi-stage rocket launches, officially framed as satellite programs, as further evidence of technological progress with clear military applications. These systems could plausibly achieve ranges of 4,000 to 6,000 kilometers, placing much of Europe within reach, he said.
The same logic extends to Iran's nuclear program, arguably the central rationale behind the US operation. Drawing on materials from the "nuclear archive" obtained by Israel in 2018, as well as Iran's demonstrated capacity in 2021 to enrich uranium to 60%, Fleitz argues that "Tehran's nuclear ambitions have never ceased."
"Between 2020 and 2025, Iran was censured by the International Atomic Energy Agency's Board of Governors six times for refusing to cooperate with investigations of undeclared nuclear sites," he said, noting that the regime effectively circumvented the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
Objective Already Achieved
From that perspective, Fleitz believes the Trump administration has largely achieved its immediate objectives. Iran's missile infrastructure has been significantly degraded, and its nuclear development capacity has suffered major setbacks.
"Had the US not acted, by the end of 2026 Iran would have had so many missiles that it could effectively create a missile shield to protect its nuclear weapons production," the AFPI vice chair assessed.
The more difficult question now is what follows. How to translate battlefield gains into durable strategic leverage as the recently agreed cease-fire shows signs of unraveling.
Fleitz frames President Trump's continued hardline posture not as an end in itself but as a tool to shape negotiations and extract leverage.
Trump's April 1 remarks at the White House reflected that approach, he says. While emphasizing that the war "would not be an endless one," the president signaled a willingness to intensify air operations to complete the mission.
According to Fleitz, an ex-CIA analyst, the strikes are likely to focus on missile and drone systems that threaten shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, while US forces are expected to expand their presence in the Arabian Sea to ensure a rapid response if conditions deteriorate.
Allies Under Pressure
Meanwhile, President Trump on Monday turned his fire again on European and Asian allies who rely on Hormuz but are unwilling to help keep it open. The Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday that the administration is even weighing punitive measures against some NATO members, including possible troop withdrawal.
Fleitz shares elements of that frustration, particularly with European partners. "This is an operation that will benefit global security, but NATO and other allies refused to lift a finger," he said, adding that the consequences would be lasting.
That said, the former White House official said Japan occupies a fundamentally different position from NATO and that Trump is acutely aware of the legal and constitutional constraints under which Tokyo operates. He also rejected the characterization of Trump as an isolationist, describing his worldview as fundamentally "alliance-focused."
On broader regional challenges, including China and North Korea, Fleitz sees Washington's continued commitment, saying, "American security becomes stronger when Japan becomes stronger."
But at the same time, he added that a more engaged Japan would, in turn, strengthen the alliance as a whole and enhance deterrence across the Indo-Pacific.
Asked whether Middle East volatility could affect the midterms, Fleitz said political impact would be limited, provided the conflict "does not last longer and involve [American] boots on the ground."
RELATED:
- Fred Fleitz on Iran, North Korea, and the Changing Security Landscape
- Takaichi Meets Trump as Iran Crisis Raises Pressure on Allies
Author: Kenji Yoshida
