Following weeks of intense negotiation between the United States and Iran in Geneva that failed to culminate in a nuclear-arms agreement, the United States and Israel launched a preemptive attack on Iran on February 28. The Trump Administration has named the campaign “Operation Epic Fury.”
As the war approaches its fourth week, Iran has promised “retaliation” against the United States.
The war marks a significant escalation in the U.S.-Iran conflict that has been ongoing since 1979, when Iranian revolutionaries deposed the U.S.-backed shah and held 52 American hostages in a crisis that tarnished the foreign policy legacy of the Carter presidency. In more recent years, Iran’s nuclear program has been of particular concern, prompting diplomatic action like the Iran Nuclear Deal in 2015 and military action like the U.S. bombing of Iranian nuclear sites in the 2025 Twelve-Day War.
Most recently, January protests against the economic collapse and devaluation of Iranian currency were met with a violent crackdown in which Iranian security forces allegedly massacred crowds of protesters, causing President Trump to respond with a promise that “help [was] on its way.”
Daniel Philpott, Professor of Political Science, acknowledged the brutality of the Iranian regime, but argued that the war does not satisfy the criteria of a just war due to the “dubious” and unclear nature of the Trump administration’s aims in the conflict. Philpott also argued the conflict does not satisfy the requirement of an “ongoing or imminent attack.”
“[President Trump] invokes Iran’s nuclear potential, but he and his administration have been highly inconsistent about how far away from a bomb Iran is. He has spoken of overturning the regime but then has backed off on this goal,” Philpott explained.
Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Joe Kent resigned on March 17, arguing there was “no imminent threat” from the Iranian regime and that the Trump administration was influenced by pressure from “Israel and its powerful American lobby.”
David Keppel, a sophomore political science major, argued there was justification given the threat that a nuclear Iran posed. “[W]e’ve been in pseudo-wars with and fighting [Iran] for decades now,” he explained. “[Iran] most recently [has] been behind Hezbollah and all the terrorism in Israel. The method and justification [are] up for debate, but … I don’t think there’s a lack of cause.”
Josh Moniz, a junior computer engineering major, also acknowledged that there was a need for the United States to intervene in Iran, though he noted aspects of the conflict that demand investigation and are difficult to justify.
Moniz noted he was “complacent until [he became aware of] the bombing of the girls’ school,” referring to the accidental bombing of the Shajarah Tabbeyeh elementary school in Minab as a result of outdated targeting data.
Sophomore history major Jakob Kjellberg echoed Philpott’s concerns about the aims of the war, arguing that “nobody knows the endgame” in the conflict. Kjellberg noted the catastrophic consequences if the United States fails to secure the Strait of Hormuz, where, at the time of publication, oil supply transits are at a standstill, affecting global energy markets.
Among Americans, opposition to the war has been relatively united among Democratic lawmakers, in comparison to past conflicts in the Middle East. The majority of the American public (53 percent) does not believe that Iran poses an imminent threat and is opposed to the war, according to recent polling, with support and opposition largely falling along partisan lines and a substantial majority of independents (60 percent) opposed to the war.
Philpott also expressed concern for the operations’ success. He compared Trump’s foreign policy to American foreign policy under presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, pointing to the wars in Iraq in 2003 and Libya in 2011 that caused the deaths of thousands of American troops and created substantial political instability. Ultimately, Philpott noted, “the theocracy is still in power,” and even if it were to fall, “a civil war or major violent unrest is a clear prospect.”
Brady Seaburg is a sophomore studying economics, political science, and constitutional studies. He can be reached at bseaburg@nd.edu.