US-Iran Standoff: Will Trump Deploy Ground Troops?

Published: 22 April 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

The doomsday scenario that Donald Trump swore he would never countenance is nearing. Many fear a major deployment could embroil the US in a Middle East forever war. A two-week ceasefire in the war with Iran is coming to an abrupt end. Prospects for renewed negotiations now seem to be hanging by a very thin thread. The chances of the president breaking that pledge and ordering an incursion are rising. Despite increasing hopes for a lasting peace, the administration has deployed more forces. This is a clear signal of readiness for a significant and potentially bloody escalation. By the time the task force arrives, ten thousand additional troops will have been sent. These forces have been moved since hostilities were paused back on the eighth of April.

Ali Vaez is the Iran project director at the International Crisis Group today. He suggested that if we pay attention to Trump’s actions, an invasion is likely. We have not seen him deploy significant military assets without eventually using them as well. He has often used American military might when he has sent it to regions. He has sent thousands of troops, so the odds of an invasion are much higher. There is a very clear risk of mission creep occurring in this volatile region. The regime in Tehran may have reached a similar conclusion regarding these recent military movements. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf is the speaker of the Iranian parliament and a lead negotiator. He said on Monday that the regime was ready to deploy new cards on the battlefield.

Analysts say Iran’s military planners have spent years assiduously preparing for a massive land invasion. Judging by the rhetoric of senior figures, they are actually relishing the potential prospect. Abbas Araghchi is the Iranian foreign minister who led two rounds of peace talks recently. When asked if Iran feared a ground invasion, he was aggressively defiant in tone. He noted that they are waiting for them because they are confident they can confront. He stated that it would be a big disaster for the Americans who attempt it. Ashkan Hashemipour is an Iran analyst at the University of Oxford who studied these remarks. He does not think it is just rhetoric because Iran is doing quite well. They are fighting in the skies and the sea, but they are strong on land.

Fuelling Iranian confidence is the fact that the republic has fought off a prior invasion. The long war with Iraq was the proving ground for the current generation of leaders. Triggered when Saddam Hussein ordered Iraqi forces to invade, it turned into a bloody grind. It ended in a stalemate after ideologically driven Iranian forces repelled the better-equipped army. Iraq had been supplied by the west as well as the Soviet Union during that conflict. Nader Hashemi is a professor of Middle East and Islamic politics at Georgetown University. He said that war was a foundational experience for the Iranian hardliners and local conservatives. They viewed it as a major attempt by the United States to undermine their revolution.

There are clear lines that the republic draws from that history to this current war. From their perspective, what is happening now proves their previous fears were absolutely correct today. The greatest power in the world is trying to topple the republic and now plans occupation. Militarily and technologically outmatched by the US, the IRGC would depend on many asymmetric tactics. They would lean heavily on guerrilla warfare in the event of a large US invasion. To give maximum flexibility, the force has been divided into thirty-one smaller provincial units. This overrides the need for a centralised command that could be eliminated by recent US strikes.

Saeid Golkar is a politics professor at the University of Tennessee who studies this military structure. The plan was devised after the US-led invasion of Iraq in the year 2003. The idea is to break Iran into a mosaic with each piece defending itself independently. A vital role would be played by the conventional armed forces known as the Artesh. Under changes from 2009, the Artesh was broken into rapid action units across the country. The purpose was freeing local commanders from the need to rely on a central command. The main role would be to compel US forces to fight two different wars simultaneously. The IRGC-led unconventional war rests on support from the youth volunteer force called Basij.

The Basij became famous for human wave attacks on Iraqi forces during the eighties conflict. They were driven by a fervent revolutionary desire to attain martyrdom for their Shia faith. The key unit would be the Imam Hussein battalion named after a historic religious figure. But Golkar played down the significance, describing it as an instrument of intense domestic repression. He doubted many members would fight, citing a decline in devoutness and unhappiness with leadership. With Trump’s focus on reopening the strait, ground troops might not hit the main land. They could be limited to occupying islands in the Gulf off the southern coast. Such deployments would leave US troops vulnerable to sudden missile and drone attacks by Iran.

The Iranian regime is also likely to pressure its proxy Houthi allies in Yemen. This could close the shipping lane between the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean entirely. That would cause global energy prices to rocket in a very short amount of time. Vaez said that there is no military solution to safely reopen the strait for trade. Even if Trump occupies the southern shore and all the islands, drones remain dangerous. They could fire from much farther inland to disrupt traffic on the narrow strait. That could pave the way for the denouement of a land war that lasted decades. Iran has been preparing for this after years of shadow conflict with Washington worldwide.

The same guerrilla tactics used in other countries will likely greet any US invasion force. Roadside bombs made from improvised explosive devices were perfected in Iraq by the late commander. But Golkar notes one vital difference regarding the absence of a meddling outside power today. In Iraq, it was Iran that tried to create a quagmire for the American forces. Because there are no external countries to support an insurgency here, it will be different. The outcome will likely hinge on the attitudes of a disaffected population and American patience. Any kind of ground invasion would probably entail significant casualties on the US side itself. Vaez added that Trump may have already forfeited public support from local regime opponents today.

Public opinion is turning against this war and putting troops on the ground helps leadership. If there are American boots on Iranian soil, the IRGC would consider them easy targets. They would definitely try to significantly bump up the casualty numbers for the American forces. They know that the dual scenario of high energy prices and casualties would destroy Trump.

Check our latest news