Periodically bombing Iran to suppress its military recovery - a strategy known in defense circles as "mowing the lawn" - creates an open-ended commitment that grows less effective with each cycle. Two Columbia University defense experts, Richard Betts and Stephen Biddle, have argued that this fallback plan energizes Iran's determination to fight back while offering only temporary tactical relief.
The scholars laid out their case in a Foreign Affairs article, "Hvylya" reports. In June 2025, Trump declared Iran's nuclear program "obliterated," yet decided less than a year later that it had to be struck again. "It will hardly be a surprise if the same ineffectiveness of preventive war will have to be faced when the dust settles after the current one," the authors write.
Each round of strikes depends on reliable intelligence about the location of nuclear infrastructure and weapons facilities. The stunning intelligence coups that enabled coordinated killing of dozens of Iranian leaders in both June 2025 and March 2026 might suggest thorough knowledge is possible, but "reliably thorough knowledge cannot be assumed in the future," the professors caution. Meanwhile, each attack spurs Iran to improve concealment and adapt its defenses.
Betts and Biddle warn that periodic mowing "cannot assuredly prevent the preservation and concealment of the makings for a few crude weapons." While inferior nuclear weapons would not attract Tehran under normal conditions, "such weapons could have greater appeal for a desperate regime after it has been repeatedly humiliated and enraged by its enemies' attacks."
The cyclical escalation pattern, the scholars argue, could eventually produce something comparable to Hamas's October 7, 2023, attacks on Israel - a scenario where degraded but desperate adversaries strike back with whatever capabilities remain.
Also read: "Hvylya" explored how oil markets reacted when Trump briefly suspended the bombing campaign.