United States President Donald Trump has announced that the military campaign against Iran was initially projected to last four to five weeks, but could extend “far longer” depending on developments.
Speaking from the White House, Trump emphasized that Iran’s missile program and nuclear ambitions posed “grave threats” to the U.S. and its allies, framing the conflict as a decisive mission rather than an open‑ended war.
Trump explained that the original plan focused on terminating Iran’s military leadership within a month. He noted that the U.S. and Israel had already achieved significant progress, including the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and senior commanders of the Revolutionary Guard.
The president also warned that Iran’s ballistic missile program was expanding rapidly, with capabilities to strike Europe and U.S. bases overseas.
He argued that the program was designed to shield nuclear weapons development, which he described as “highly forbidden” and intolerable for both the Middle East and the American people.
Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth reinforced Trump’s message, dismissing concerns about a prolonged intervention. “This is not Iraq. This is not endless,” Hegseth told reporters, stressing that the mission was to destroy Iran’s missile threat, dismantle its navy, and prevent nuclear development. He insisted that the campaign would avoid nation‑building or democracy‑building exercises, focusing solely on military objectives.
Meanwhile, the conflict has already destabilized the region. Retaliatory strikes from Iran have killed civilians in Lebanon, Israel, Iraq, and Gulf states, while energy infrastructure has been targeted, raising fears of global oil price spikes. Analysts warn that the war could push Iran closer to pursuing a nuclear deterrent, as future leadership may see it as a defensive necessity. Critics also question the legality of the strikes under U.S. and international law, noting that attacks must respond to an imminent threat and that only Congress can declare war.
As casualties mount and regional tensions escalate, Trump has not provided a clear timeline for the conclusion of operations. While he insists the campaign is decisive and limited, the possibility of a longer war looms, with global implications for security and energy markets.
Impact on Kenya
For Kenya, the war carries significant economic consequences. Rising global oil prices triggered by attacks on Gulf energy sites could directly affect transport costs, agricultural production, and household budgets. Fuel price increases often lead to higher fares for public transport, elevated costs for farmers relying on diesel‑powered machinery, and inflation in food prices. With Kenya’s economy heavily dependent on imports of petroleum products, any disruption in Middle Eastern supply chains could strain government subsidies and push consumers to bear the burden. Analysts warn that prolonged instability in the Gulf could further weaken the shilling against the dollar, making imports more expensive and squeezing Kenyan households already facing high living costs.