Retired Colonel Anthony Aguilar argued that Iran is carefully avoiding what he described as an escalation trap set by the United States, as military warnings, naval deployments and regional tensions continue to converge across West Asia. In his view, the central question is not whether negotiations can resume, but whether any material conditions have changed since earlier rounds of confrontation and failed diplomacy.
Na entrevista ao canal Dialogue Works, conduzida pelo apresentador do canal, Anthony Aguilar said Iran recognizes the tactical logic behind U.S. moves in the region. He suggested that placing high-value military assets within reach could function either as preparation for a major operation or as bait, inviting an Iranian strike that could then be presented publicly as proof that Tehran was the aggressor. According to Anthony Aguilar, Iran “knows the game” and is not taking that bait.
The discussion turned to recent State Department warnings advising Americans to exercise caution or leave parts of West Asia. Anthony Aguilar said he believed Donald Trump had seriously considered strikes against Ansar Allah in Yemen, possibly reaching the point of being “locked and loaded” before backing away. He linked the warnings to a broader regional alert posture, including concerns over shipping lanes, U.S. bases, interceptor shortages and the risks of opening simultaneous fronts in Yemen, the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz.
According to Anthony Aguilar, allied reactions may have reflected concern that Washington was close to launching military operations. He cited Italy’s decision to send warships to the Red Sea to protect Italian shipping interests and the United Kingdom’s willingness to support Saudi Arabia as examples of countries preparing to shield their own assets. He also suggested that military advisers, possibly within the Joint Chiefs of Staff or U.S. Central Command, may have warned the White House that a wider confrontation would be difficult to manage.
The interview also focused on the reported use or testing of Iranian anti-ship capabilities, including claims surrounding a missile threat to a U.S. aircraft carrier. Anthony Aguilar said he believed the missile involved in an encounter with the USS George Washington was the Qasem Basir, which he described as a hypersonic ballistic anti-ship missile designed to evade advanced air and missile defense systems. He said he believed the carrier and one escort destroyer sustained damage, although he acknowledged they were not sunk or removed permanently from service.
Anthony Aguilar further argued that Iran likely possesses additional missile capabilities that have not yet been used against U.S. forces. He said the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Aerospace Command would control longer-range systems and suggested that Iran may have benefited from cooperation or technology transfer involving China. In that context, he mentioned the Chinese CM302 and YJ12 families of anti-ship missiles, saying Tehran may possess a variant or adapted technology that could threaten major naval assets.
His assessment emphasized that speed alone is not the only decisive factor in modern anti-ship warfare. Anthony Aguilar said missile countermeasures, terminal trajectory and the ability to evade systems such as THAAD, Patriot or naval Aegis defenses may be just as important as Mach speed. In his view, this uncertainty makes U.S. naval commanders more cautious about penetrating operations near the Strait of Hormuz, especially if Iran holds back capabilities that Washington has not yet seen in combat conditions.
The interview presented a picture of a regional chessboard in which warnings, deployments and missile tests all serve political as well as military purposes. Anthony Aguilar’s core argument was that hope alone is not a strategy for diplomacy, and that without a change in underlying conditions, renewed negotiations risk producing the same outcome as previous rounds. His comments portrayed Iran as cautious but prepared, and the United States as weighing military options under constraints that could quickly expand any local strike into a much broader crisis.