Six Months Into the Iran War: How The Conflict Has Changed Iran, US Politics And The West Asia

Six months of US and Israeli strikes have inflicted major damage on Iran, but Tehran retains the ability to fight, while the conflict has disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, pushed up energy costs and put growing pressure on the United States and its allies.

The war has lasted far longer than President Donald Trump initially predicted. Trump had said the conflict would be over in four weeks and later called it a “little excursion”. Iran has not surrendered, the Strait of Hormuz remains severely disrupted and there is still no clear path to ending the conflict. Washington is now returning to economic pressure after apparently recognising that further military strikes may not force concessions from Tehran. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has told allies that the US is unlikely to launch new attacks “for the time being”.

The consequences of the conflict are already being felt across several areas: Trump's political standing, the global economy, Iran's military and economy, security across the Middle East, the country's nuclear programme and US military readiness.

The war is adding to Trump's political problems

The conflict was unpopular when it began and has since lost further support among US voters. That creates a challenge for Trump as Republicans prepare to defend narrow majorities in both chambers of Congress in November's midterm elections.

Trump's approval rating has dropped from 40% to 33% since the conflict began, according to Reuters/Ipsos polling. Only 31% of Americans approve of the war, while rising gas prices have weakened Trump's 2024 campaign promise to lower costs for Americans.

Trump has said Iran's missile build-up and nuclear ambitions made military action necessary. But most voters have not been persuaded. Support for the conflict is lower than approval ratings recorded for other recent US conflicts at a similar stage. The war in Afghanistan, for instance, had approval ratings above 50% for years in Gallup polls.

The political problem also reflects divisions within Trump's Republican Party. More isolationist Republicans are calling for a quick end to the war, while other Republican lawmakers want the president to continue military pressure on Tehran.

With voters already facing higher prices, the conflict could become an issue for Republicans heading into the midterms.

The war has hit energy markets but the global economy has proved resilient

The Strait of Hormuz has been at the centre of the economic fallout. The waterway between Iran and Oman narrows to about 21 miles (34 km) and carries roughly a fifth of the world's energy supplies.

The US and Israeli attacks immediately raised concerns about what prolonged disruption there could mean for oil markets and the wider economy. Oil prices rose sharply, prompting fears of a global downturn.

Those fears have not fully materialised. The global economy has been more resilient than during the oil shocks of the 1970s, although the war has still affected growth forecasts.

The International Monetary Fund has reduced its global growth forecast twice since the conflict began. It now expects the world economy to grow by 3.0% this year, down from the 3.3% forecast it gave in January.

Major economies are less energy-intensive than they were in the 1970s, reducing their exposure to higher energy costs. Strong spending and investment have also helped absorb the shock, including continued spending linked to the boom in artificial intelligence.

Iran's military capacity has been reduced, but not eliminated

The attacks have caused major damage to Iran's military and economy, but Tehran retains the capacity to launch attacks and keep the Strait of Hormuz closed.

In May, Admiral Brad Cooper, the top US military commander for the Middle East, told Congress that American forces had destroyed 161 Iranian naval vessels and disabled 82% of Iran's air-defence systems. He said Iran's air force, which had previously flown up to 100 sorties a day, was no longer conducting missions.

Iran still has missiles and drones and has used them against shipping and US military installations elsewhere in the region.

The full extent of the damage to Iran's missile arsenal remains uncertain. Reuters reported in March that the US could determine with certainty that it had destroyed only about one-third of Iran's vast missile arsenal. The status of roughly another third was unclear at the time. Sources told Reuters that bombing had likely damaged, destroyed or buried some of those missiles in underground tunnels and bunkers.

The military losses have been accompanied by a deepening economic crisis. The war has killed thousands, worsened inflation and disrupted trade. Food inflation reached 128% year-on-year in July, according to Iran's Statistical Center.

The conflict has also changed Iran's domestic political environment. Existing political divisions have been pushed into the background, while the government has responded with a tougher crackdown on dissent.

Iran's attacks have exposed US allies to greater regional risks

The campaign was intended to remove Iran as a threat to the Middle East. Instead, Iranian retaliation has exposed US allies to missile and drone attacks and created further disruption across the region.

Iranian strikes on US-allied Gulf Arab states have hit US military and diplomatic facilities and disrupted air travel. The attacks have added pressure to countries already affected by the wider conflict.

Shipping has faced disruption from more than one direction. Iranian attacks on vessels have coincided with a Houthi blockade targeting Saudi-linked traffic in the Red Sea. Together, they have increased insurance and transport costs.

The consequences extend beyond individual attacks. Disrupted shipping is affecting supply chains and adding uncertainty for Gulf economies, making the regional economic impact broader than the damage to vessels or facilities directly hit during attacks.

Iran's nuclear programme has been damaged, but its status remains uncertain

Iran's nuclear infrastructure has suffered significant damage. During an earlier assault in June 2025 and in the opening phase of the current war, US and Israeli attacks badly damaged three of Iran's known enrichment plants and sites suspected of weapons-related work. Israeli strikes have also killed leading nuclear scientists.

US intelligence assessments in May estimated that Iran's nuclear “breakout time” — the time needed to produce enough fissile material for a bomb — had increased to up to one year, compared with up to six months before the war.

Preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is Trump's top stated goal in the conflict. But the condition of the nuclear programme cannot be established fully because UN inspectors have not returned to Iran's nuclear sites.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has been unable to verify the location of roughly 440 kg of uranium enriched to 60% since the 2025 strikes. That stockpile could potentially be enriched further to weapons grade at a covert facility.

Iran has long denied seeking a nuclear bomb.

The prolonged war is drawing down US military resources

The conflict has also affected US military readiness, with aircraft and drones lost, large quantities of munitions used and military assets shifted towards the Middle East.

A May Congressional Research Service report said 42 US military aircraft had been lost in the conflict, including losses caused by Iranian fire and accidents.

Munitions have become a particular concern. Reuters reported that the US military had used “virtually all” of its global supply of certain precision missiles.

A Center for Strategic and International Studies estimate found that by July, the United States had used about 65% of its Patriot interceptors. Its THAAD, or Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense, interceptor stockpile had also fallen by at least 38%.

Washington has moved fighter jets, warships and other assets to the Middle East from Europe and the Asia-Pacific. The extended deployments have raised questions about US military readiness in other regions.

The USS Gerald R. Ford spent more than a year deployed, its longest deployment since the Vietnam War. Lawmakers also raised concerns about conditions aboard the USS Abraham Lincoln after 200 consecutive days at sea.

The Lincoln was replaced last week by another carrier that had been operating in the Pacific. The move highlights the strain the prolonged conflict is placing on US military assets.