President Donald Trump delivers an address to the nation alongside Vice President JD Vance (L), Secretary of State Marco Rubio (C) and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at the White House in Washington on June 21 after U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Pool photo by Carlos Barria/UPI | License Photo
In political terms, President Donald Trump could declare last week as the equivalent of a World Series-winning grand slam home run or a last-second touchdown to clinch the Super Bowl.
In foreign policy, according to Trump, 30y Navy Tomahawk cruise missiles and 14 blockbuster 30,000-pound bombs “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program and gained a cease-fire between the two belligerents — Iran and Israel.
And for the first time, Trump convinced 31 of 32 NATO members to increase overall defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product– 3.5% for defense and 1.5% for building greater “resilience” in the event of conflict.
Domestically, the stunning win for the New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani and various Supreme Court decisions, one of which reduced the authority of district judges to issue nationwide injunctions, will be regarded as great political victories for the president.
Whether the “hat trick” of three successes will occur before July Fourth with the passage of Trump’s “beautiful big bill,” will be determined soon. But any White House would be euphoric about the last two weeks unless or until a truly independent analysis determines the immediate and longer-term consequences of these events.
America’s Operation Midnight Hammer exploited the Israeli air and missile campaigns that neutralized Iran’s defenses and greatly damaged its nuclear infrastructure. But without accurate bomb damage assessment that will take time to generate or boots on the ground to make a physical inspection of the extent of destruction, a rush to judgment such as the president made is likely to be premature.
Questions about how much of Iran’s highly enriched uranium survived, where it is stored and if Iran has enough centrifuges to continue enrichment need answers.
Further, how long the cease-fire lasts and what the Iranian and Israeli exit strategies are remain far from clear. If Iran refuses to accept the existence of Israel with some form of recognition and agrees to forgo its nuclear weapons aspirations, either will be a deal breaker. And without any peace agreement by both parties, what would prevent Israel (or the United States) to reattack Iran in the future?
At home, debate over the War Powers Act passed in 1973 to limit the president’s authority to order the U.S. military into action will not resolve the inherent contradiction between Congress and its sole responsibility to declare war and the president’s constitutional duty to serve as commander-in-chief.
While virtually every issue in the United States has become politicized — especially those with the greatest visibility — to illustrate this cynicism, suppose Kamala Harris had been president and had ordered these strikes. How would Republicans have responded?
A good guess is that the same criticisms and cries of anguish made by Democrats over Operation Midnight Hammer would be repeated by Republicans to deride the president.
Indeed, it is unfortunate that what Harris might have done will not be raised. If it were, Democrats, like Republicans, would call this question too hypothetical to be answered. Worse, any objective evaluation of the impact of Operation Midnight Hammer almost certainly will be judged through a biased political lens as Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were in 2003.
For NATO, even if an increase to 5% of GDP were achievable, what would this mean for the alliance? Currently, U.S. GDP is about $30 trillion. Five percent equates to $1.5 trillion, with about $1.05 trillion to defense and the remainder to resilience.
The United States presently will spend just over $1 trillion for defense depending on what is in or out of the reconciliation bill, assuming it becomes law. Because of uncontrolled real annual cost growth of 5% to 7% (which is above the inflation rate) for all programs from people to precision weapons, this increase will not be sufficient to maintain the current U.S. force levels.
The same math applies to all NATO members, and their politics suggest that the 5% goal will not be met.
In domestic politics, Trump may indeed have benefitted. If Mamdani wins in New York City, Democratic politics will appear to have moved far more to the left. That trend cost Democrats the presidency in 2024. If it continues, that could hazard the 2026 midterm elections and potential control of Congress. And defining the extent of presidential powers will continue to be an unresolved and probably unresolvable quandary.
So, is Trump in wonderland or wonderment? Has this week been a political grand slam? We will not know the answers right away. But we will know them sometime. That will truly be a real day of reckoning.
Harlan Ullman is UPI’s Arnaud de Borchgrave Distinguished Columnist; senior adviser at Washington’s Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book, co-written with Field Marshal The Lord David Richards, former U.K. chief of defense and due out next year, is Who Thinks Wins: Preventing Strategic Catastrophe. The writer can be reached on X @harlankullman.
