President Trump faces the aftermath of a hastily arranged cease-fire deal that lacks significant progress on the central issues of the conflict.

During a NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, he pronounced the cease-fire with Iran as “over” after not even a month. This comes just two weeks after confidently claiming at the Great American State Fair that peace was imminent in the Middle East. The cease-fire, marked by a 14-paragraph memorandum of understanding, avoided addressing key issues and sought quick resolution to allow Mr. Trump to declare a deal was in place.

Mr. Trump finds himself wrestling with the effects of his speedy negotiations, driven by his real estate experience, where he expected Iran to prioritize economic advantages over its long-standing revolutionary ideals. This has landed him with undesirable choices, facing challenges around Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, support for terrorist organizations, and human rights practices.

During the summit, military tensions had heightened, prompting Mr. Trump to threaten extensive combat actions. These threats included seizing an important Iranian oil-processing island and striking the country’s infrastructure and desalination plants—actions that could be deemed war crimes. Yet, he expressed reluctance toward targeting the desalination facilities.

Such threats have been made without subsequent action previously, and Mr. Trump stated he did not foresee returning to an extensive war. There is scant domestic backing for such a conflict, and the proximity to the midterm elections adds political pressure. The Iranian leadership is fully aware of these dynamics.

An alternative for the president involves reinstating the American blockade on Iranian ports to sever its crucial economic connections. This would demand prolonged American engagement in the area. Mr. Trump had suggested earlier that this could trigger an economic disaster for Iran, but earlier efforts to do so had not succeeded as he speculated.