Podcast Summary: "Who Is Winning the War in Iran?"
The Daily (The New York Times) – March 19, 2026
Host: Natalie Kitroeff | Guest: Eric Schmitt
Overview
This episode examines the state of the war in Iran three weeks after its outbreak, focusing on the military and political realities faced by the United States and Israel versus the resilient Iranian regime. Natalie Kitroeff and NYT security correspondent Eric Schmitt break down the paradox at the heart of the conflict: while US and Israeli militaries have largely destroyed Iran’s conventional capacity and key leadership, Iran has not capitulated—instead, it’s pivoted to asymmetric and economic warfare that deeply complicates American goals and global stability.
Key Discussion Points and Insights
1. Military Situation: US & Israeli Progress
- US and Israeli strikes have dramatically degraded Iran’s conventional military.
- Over 120 Iranian naval vessels destroyed (02:31).
- 7,800+ military targets in Iran struck (missile systems, drone storage, missile launchers) (02:31).
- Israeli air force has killed top Iranian security leaders, including Security Chief Ali Larajani, Qasemreza Soleimani (war leader), Basij chief, and Iran’s intelligence chief (03:11).
“In less than two weeks, we’ve rendered the Iranian navy combat ineffective... They’ve hit over 120 Iranian naval vessels.”
— Secretary Pete Hegseth, 02:25
2. Iran’s Response: Asymmetric and Economic Warfare
- Guerrilla, decentralized tactics:
- Strait of Hormuz blockaded, economic pain inflicted globally:
- Critical maritime choke point; commerce at a trickle due to attacks/threats.
- "Nearly 20 different tankers...have been struck." (10:06)
“With just a handful of mines…the threat of attacks, they've basically brought international commerce to a trickle.”
— Eric Schmitt, 09:16
3. Civilian and Military Casualties
- Estimated toll so far:
4. Political Goals vs Military Reality
- US objectives are shifting and sometimes contradictory:
5. The Strait Problem: Anticipated, but Mishandled
- US leaders briefed the President that this scenario was likely, but response lagged:
- Intelligence predicted Iran would use Strait of Hormuz as leverage.
- US didn't have minesweeping/naval assets in place; no international coalition was prepped (16:04).
“While it was predictable, the way in which the Iranian regime reached for this option quickly...took some American officials off guard. And now they're playing catch up.”
— Eric Schmitt, 17:15
6. Grim Options for the US Moving Forward
- All outcomes are highly risky and unsatisfying:
- Naval convoys escorting tankers through the Strait:
- Complex, dangerous, and still not a guarantee against attacks (21:08).
- Could see US ships targeted and the risk rests with private shippers and insurers.
- Seizing Kharg Island (Iran’s oil export hub):
- Would require amphibious assault; occupation would provoke more attacks and endanger global oil markets if infrastructure is damaged (23:22).
- No guarantee it would break Iran's asymmetric resistance.
- Eliminating Iran’s nuclear capacity:
- Declaring victory and exiting:
- President Trump has "floated this idea," but it wouldn’t end Iranian attacks or guarantee regional calm, and the political optics may be fraught (31:40).
- Israeli leadership may not agree to a halt.
- Naval convoys escorting tankers through the Strait:
7. Regime Change Now Seen as Unrealistic
- US intelligence sees no path to regime change via airstrikes.
- Regime is “badly weakened” but more hardline, willing to use severe repression (34:18).
“There isn’t really a good chance of regime change right now. The best you’re going to get is a badly weakened state...but it’s very unlikely you’re going to have regime change of the kind the president talked about.”
— Eric Schmitt, 34:18 - No significant defections or popular uprisings despite leader losses.
8. Political Dilemmas: Shifting Goals, Endgame Unclear
- US and Israeli leadership not fully aligned on objectives or off-ramps (32:43).
- Administration is torn between escalation and seeking an off-ramp.
“The president is really weighing two conflicting impulses. On the one hand, he may want to double down, send in ground forces, or does he look for an off ramp?”
— Eric Schmitt, 35:51
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
-
“They've killed the top security chief, Ali Larajani, another killed by Israel, Gomeraza Soleimani...and then on Wednesday, they announced they killed the intelligence chief for Iran.”
— Eric Schmitt, 03:11 -
“Even if you get 95, 98, 99% of the threat eliminated, there's always going to be that 1% chance or less that some kind of rocket or missile could get through and damage or destroy some valuable ships.”
— Eric Schmitt, 12:13 -
“The Iranians know this is their real ace in the hole.”
— Eric Schmitt, 13:59 -
“This is something that, while it was predictable, the way in which The Iranian regime reached for this option quickly...took some American officials off guard. And now they're playing catch up to some extent.”
— Eric Schmitt, 17:15 -
“The options are not good. They basically range from bad to really bad to worse for the President right now.”
— Eric Schmitt, 18:53 -
“...it’s very unlikely at this point that you’re going to have regime change of the kind that the president talked about on the first night of the war.”
— Eric Schmitt, 34:18
Important Segments with Timestamps
- Military progress and Iranian losses: [02:05] – [04:00]
- Iranian asymmetric tactics, economic warfare begins: [08:47] – [11:45]
- Discussion of loss of life and US force posture: [05:44] – [07:34]
- Straits of Hormuz as chokepoint: [09:16] – [11:45]
- Decentralized ‘mosaic defense’: [12:51] – [13:46]
- US strategic miscalculation on Strait closure: [14:42] – [17:31]
- Policy options: convoys, Kharg seizure, nuclear sites: [21:08] – [30:29]
- Debate on declaring victory and ending war: [31:01] – [32:43]
- Regime change increasingly seen as unattainable: [34:18]
Tone and Flow
The conversation is detailed, precise, and sober in tone. There’s a clear contrast between military achievement and the stark limitations in the face of decentralized, economic, and asymmetric resistance. Both Natalie and Eric emphasize the complexity and danger of every possible next step, as well as the persistent unpredictability of the regime’s resilience.
Summary Takeaway
Despite the vast success of American and Israeli campaigns at crushing Iran’s leadership and military firepower, Iran’s regime has pivoted to tactics that make old definitions of “winning” nearly obsolete—mines, speedboats, decentralized commands, and economic chokeholds now shape the conflict. The options left to US leadership range from dangerous to potentially disastrous, and genuine victory or regime change appears out of reach. The war’s real endpoint, and definition of success, remain deeply uncertain.