13MAY

IDF: halfway done. Trump: already won.

4 min read

20:00UTC

Israel's top general assessed the war at its midpoint with three more weeks of operations planned. Three days earlier, Trump declared it 'militarily won.'

← Back to 800 drones, three ceasefires, one cliff Jump to analysis ↓

ConflictDeveloping

Key takeaway

'Halfway through' to mid-April reveals a six-week campaign with no publicly defined end-state.

IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir released a video statement Saturday: "We are halfway through, but the direction is clear." Defence Minister Israel Katz, speaking from the IDF's underground command centre, stated strikes "will significantly escalate" this week. According to The Times of Israel, the IDF is planning at least three more weeks of operations; the operational timeline extends through Passover in mid-April, with contingencies beyond ¹. A senior Iranian source told CNN that Tehran does not believe Trump's wind-down claim ².

Three days before Zamir's assessment, Trump posted on Truth Social that the US was "getting very close to meeting our objectives" and considering "winding down" military operations, describing the war as "Militarily WON" . Zamir's own words place the campaign at its midpoint — meaning the earliest conclusion, by Israeli military reckoning, falls in mid-April, putting the conflict's total duration at roughly seven weeks. The $200 billion supplemental funding request the Pentagon submitted — which Fortune calculated funds approximately 140 more days at the current burn rate — aligns with the IDF's extended timeline far more closely than it does with a war already won. At CSIS's estimate of $900 million per day , the three additional weeks the IDF is planning would cost the United States another $19 billion, on top of the estimated $19 billion already spent.

The gap between political messaging and operational reality has direct consequences. Republican opposition to the war supplemental is forming around precisely this contradiction : Senator Lisa Murkowski will not vote without a strategy outline; Representative Lauren Boebert declared herself "a no"; CNN reported GOP leaders do not believe they have the votes within their own caucus. If the war is won, the funding is inexplicable. If it is halfway through, the money is essential. Katz's promise of escalation compounds the problem — escalation is what an expanding campaign looks like, not a wind-down. NBC News reported that military officials include exit options in Trump's daily briefings; he has exercised none . Tehran, for its part, has read the operational signals rather than the political ones. FM Araghchi shifted last week from categorical refusal to a conditional end-state framework , but Zamir's halfway assessment and Katz's escalation pledge close the space for any near-term off-ramp. The war's timeline is being set in Tel Aviv's underground command centre, not on Truth Social.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

When the IDF Chief of Staff says 'we are halfway through,' he is revealing that this is a planned, phased military campaign with a deliberate timeline — not a reactive escalation spiral. Measured from the conflict's apparent start around 1 March, 'halfway through' to mid-April implies roughly a six-week operational plan. Defence Minister Katz's announcement of 'significant escalation' this week means more strikes on Iranian infrastructure, which will generate more Iranian retaliation and more civilian casualties on both sides before any end-state is reached. Critically, neither Zamir nor Katz defined what 'complete' looks like. They did not say operations will stop when enrichment capacity is destroyed, or when the Strait reopens, or when Iran's missile stocks fall below a threshold. Campaigns without defined end-states have a documented historical tendency to extend past their originally planned duration — 2006 is the canonical Israeli case.

Deep Analysis

Synthesis

The 'halfway through' statement exposes a structural US-Israel misalignment on end-state that becomes acutely operational when Trump's 48-hour Hormuz ultimatum expires Monday. If the US strikes Iranian power infrastructure, it commits to an extended conflict that directly contradicts the 'militarily WON' framing the White House issued two days earlier. If it does not, it surrenders the ultimatum's credibility at the moment of enforcement. The IDF's explicit three-week timeline forecloses the diplomatic exit that Trump's wind-down language appeared to be creating — Tel Aviv is signalling a conflict it intends to define and conclude on its own terms, not Washington's political calendar.

Root Causes

The IDF's commitment to a multi-week operational timeline reflects the structural preference in Israeli strategic culture for hakhraah — decisive military outcome — over negotiated settlement when military superiority is assessed. The Begin Doctrine's internal logic demands demonstrable physical destruction of threat capability, not mere suppression or diplomatic pause. This creates a built-in imperative to continue until destruction thresholds are met, regardless of external pressure from Washington or international partners to accept a ceasefire.

Escalation

Katz's announcement of 'significant escalation' this week, combined with the confirmed Dimona air defence failure, creates structural pressure to expand the target set beyond nuclear infrastructure to Iranian ballistic missile production and launch facilities. This would represent a qualitative shift — from targeting what Iran has built to targeting its capacity to build — and would predictably trigger a proportionate Iranian response against a broader set of US and Israeli assets across the region.

What could happen next?

2 risk1 consequence1 meaning1 precedent

Risk
The IEA's 400-million-barrel SPR release will be substantially consumed before the IDF's operational timeline concludes, removing the primary market stabilisation instrument precisely when disruption peaks.
Short term · Assessed
Consequence
Iran's escalation calculus will intensify as it adjusts to a confirmed six-week IDF timeline rather than the imminent wind-down that Trump's language implied.
Short term · Assessed
Risk
US-Israel end-state divergence creates risk of a unilateral Israeli decision to continue operations past any Washington-brokered ceasefire, as the IDF timeline does not appear to be Washington's to control.
Medium term · Suggested
Meaning
The Passover constraint in mid-April imposes a domestic Israeli religious-political deadline on war termination — the operational calendar is now shaped by the civilian calendar.
Short term · Suggested
Precedent
The Winograd Commission parallel suggests campaigns framed as 'halfway through' without defined end-states systematically extend past their originally announced duration.
Medium term · Suggested

Source Landscape

This story draws on centre-left-leaning sources from Israel

Israel×3

Primary parallel: The 2006 Lebanon War is the most direct structural precedent. Israel entered with the stated objective of neutralising Hezbollah's rocket capacity, issued mid-conflict assessments characterising progress, then extended operations repeatedly before accepting a UN ceasefire after 34 days without achieving stated goals. The Winograd Commission's post-conflict analysis documented that ambiguous end-state definitions — never specifying what 'complete' looked like — allowed operations to continue past achievable objectives while political costs accumulated.

Counter-parallel: The 1967 Six-Day War demonstrates the IDF's capacity for decisive outcomes within compact timelines when conditions favour speed — air superiority, surprise, and limited adversary strategic depth. The 2026 campaign's structure (no Israeli air superiority over Iranian airspace, no surprise, adversary with substantial strategic depth and ballistic missile reach-back) is closer to 2006 than 1967.

Why it’s relevant now

The Winograd Commission's central finding — that 'halfway through' assessments at conflict midpoints routinely underestimate the terminal phase — applies directly to Zamir's framing. 'Direction is clear' is Winograd language: it specifies trajectory without specifying destination, which is precisely the ambiguity the Commission identified as the 2006 campaign's central failure.

The IEA described its 400-million-barrel strategic petroleum reserve release as 'a stop-gap measure' contingent on swift conflict resolution. The IDF's explicit three-week operational extension to mid-April means SPR drawdown will continue at emergency rates for at minimum 21 additional days beyond what the 'stop-gap' framing implied.

At the reported 8 million barrel per day supply shortfall, the 400-million-barrel reserve provides approximately 50 days of partial offset at full drawdown — but the IDF timeline alone consumes a substantial portion of that buffer before any resolution, and Goldman Sachs has flagged that Brent could breach its 2008 all-time intraday high of $147.50 if Hormuz flows remain depressed for 60 days. The IDF's confirmed timeline puts the market squarely inside that 60-day window.

Consensus view: The Washington Institute for Near East Policy (Makovsky, Schanzer) has consistently documented that Israeli operational timelines in multi-front conflicts systematically underestimate terminal phase duration — 2006 is the canonical case, where each two-week extension was accompanied by fresh 'almost there' assessments.

Counter-view: The International Crisis Group and analysts at the Al-Ahram Centre for Political and Strategic Studies (Cairo) argue that 'halfway through' is primarily domestic political communication designed to signal progress to an Israeli public facing Passover with schools closed and cities under missile attack — the actual military timeline may be more flexible than the language implies, contingent on US pressure and Iranian battlefield performance.

Key tension: Neither Zamir nor Katz specified what 'complete' looks like — 'direction is clear' is not an end-state, and campaigns without defined objectives have a documented structural tendency to extend past their originally planned duration.

First Reported In

Update #44 · Trump: 48 hours to destroy Iran power grid

Times of Israel· 22 Mar 2026

Read original →

Causes and effects

Caused by

Trump: war nearly won; no ceasefire

Trump claimed war 'militarily won'; IDF Chief Zamir stated campaign is 'halfway through' with escalation planned.

Occurred 19 Mar 2026

Read story →

This Event

IDF: halfway done. Trump: already won.

The IDF's own operational timeline — extending through mid-April at minimum — directly contradicts the White House narrative of imminent victory and complicates the political case for the $200 billion war supplemental that already lacks the votes to pass.

Different Perspectives

NATO eastern flank (B9 + Nordics)

The B9+Nordic Bucharest joint statement on 13 May reaffirmed Ukraine's sovereignty within internationally recognised borders and backed NATO eastern flank reinforcement; the summit accepted Zelenskyy's bilateral drone deal proposal as a structural alternative to the stalled US export approval pathway, treating it as a European defence architecture question rather than aid delivery.

IAEA / Rafael Grossi

Grossi is still negotiating a sixth ZNPP repair ceasefire with no agreement after 50 days of 750 kV line disconnection; the 3 May ERCL drone strike that destroyed environmental monitoring equipment represents a qualitative escalation in infrastructure degradation that the IAEA has documented but cannot compel either party to halt.

Péter Magyar / Hungary

Magyar's incoming foreign minister pledged on 12 May that Hungary will stop abusing EU veto rights; the pledge is a statement of intent rather than a binding legal commitment, and Magyar's MEPs voted against the €90 billion loan as recently as April, while a planned referendum on Ukraine's EU accession preserves a downstream blocking lever.

EU Council and European Commission

The Magyar cabinet formation on 12 May removes the Hungary veto that had blocked the €9.1 billion first tranche since February; the Commission is now coordinating the three-document disbursement package for an early-June vote. The structural blocker is gone; the disbursement question is now scheduling, not politics.

Donald Trump / White House

Trump announced a 9-11 May three-day ceasefire with a 1,000-for-1,000 prisoner exchange attached, then called peace 'getting very close' on 11-13 May while Russia's 800-drone barrage was under way; his public framing adopted Russian diplomatic language without securing any Russian operational concession or verifying the exchange was agreed.

Vladimir Putin / Kremlin

Putin told reporters on 9 May the war is 'coming to an end' while Peskov confirmed on 13 May that territorial demands are unchanged and Russia requires full Ukrainian withdrawal from all four annexed regions; the verbal accommodation costs Moscow nothing and conditions any summit on a pre-finalised treaty Kyiv cannot accept.