|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Welcome to The Geopolity’s What We’re Watching (3W), our daily look at the interconnected worlds of Geopolitics, Economics and Energy. Curated from the world’s leading sources of information, our analysis and commentary is designed to help you make sense of the events driving the major developments in the world.
In our previously analysis of events surrounding the US – Israel Alliance War on Iran, 3W explained why the MOU was dying a slow death, and consequently why a return to all out war similar to April 2026 was the most likely shorter term scenario for the Middle East.
Since then, US president Trump has declared the MOU formally over, writes Al Jazeera, while Iran’s parliament speaker Mohammed Bager Ghalibaf declaring on X that that Iran will not bow in response to US threats and acts of aggression. “America still hasn’t learned that bullying and breaking promises are no longer cost-free. Let me put it plainly: if you strike, you’ll get hit,”: he wrote.
In this situation, where Iran has realized that control over the Strait of Hormuz is much more valuable even than having a nuclear weapon, as Reuters notes, the US is preparing for a multi-day or possibly multi-week exchange of fire with Iran over the Strait of Hormuz, writes Axios. US officials also confirmed to Axios the original 3W assessment of the MOU, stating the White House feels comfortable restarting the war because it believes it has more room to escalate after hundreds of oil tankers left the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz in recent weeks.
the White House feels comfortable restarting the war because it believes it has more room to escalate after hundreds of oil tankers left the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz in recent weeks
In our 3W view, The New York Times draws the correct conclusion from this US intention. It writes, if 40 days of bombing didn’t get the US – Israel Alliance the victory over Iran it sought, but instead led to a strengthened Iran through its control over the Strait of Hormuz; and if a end to sanctions and the promise of a $300 billion fund for reconstruction couldn’t get Iran to drop its strategic demands; what does the US plan to do different this time to get a different outcome from military action across Iran?
Already in May, writing in The Atlantic, prominent neocon geostrategic thinker and policy advisor Robert Kagan explained that the US had lost its 40 day War on Iran, and that a return to military conflict could not undo this damage. Kagan wrote, “Even if Trump were to carry out his threat to destroy Iran’s “civilization” through more bombing, Iran would still be able to launch many missiles and drones before its regime went down—assuming it did go down. Just a few successful strikes could cripple the region’s oil and gas infrastructure for years if not decades, throwing the world, and the United States, into a prolonged economic crisis. Even if Trump wanted to bomb Iran as part of an exit strategy—looking tough as a way of masking his retreat—he can’t do that without risking this catastrophe.”
This situation remains today, notes another prominent geostrategic thinker and policy advisor, Richard Haas. “We are at something of a strategic dead-end,” he said to The New York Times. “The dilemma here is that the more we attack, the more the Iranians attack the Gulf oil and energy infrastructure,” he said. “And the administration still has not figured out how to defend those sites.”
As such, the return to war seems to be be in the benefit of only those people who have an interest in perpetual warfare in the Middle East: Israel. The Financial Times writes that its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for whom the war is an imperative for political survival, and the one who is still hoping that the endurance of the Iranian regime is not inexhaustible.
if a end to sanctions and the promise of a $300 billion fund for reconstruction couldn’t get Iran to drop its strategic demands; what does the US plan to do different this time to get a different outcome from military action across Iran?
In the 3W view, the developments since the signing of the MOU are therefore evidence of our “overarching hypethesis” when it comes to geopolitics in the Middle East: Israel leads US thinking, so in the end Israel gets the outcomes it wants, with US policymakers either believing they are serving US interests, or pressured into selling Israeli interests as US interests.
As to how things should be expected to develop, early May already 3W wrote that either the US accepts defeat and makes significant compromises to Iran, or it returns to war and accepts the destructions of the global economy as a result. At that time, we also wrote that mentally the US is not ready to accept defeat, and the Israel Lobby would not allow it even if it was. Therefore, until the US realizes that Israel’s interests in the Middle East are not aligned with its interests, and consequently distances itself from Israel, the “slow burn” phase of the War on Iran will continue.
Undoubtedly, the policy makers arguing in favor of “one more push” will have a wide range of arguments why “this time will be different”. For example, the UAE is preparing to significantly increase the Arabian Gulf region’s ability to transport goods over land, bypassing the Strait of Hormuz, writes The National. Or, the progress towards sidelining Hezbollah by defeating it in Lebanon through the effective integration of the Lebanese army into the US – Israel Alliance, as documented by The National, since this, if successful, would reduce Iran’s ability to project power. Or, the attacks on the rail network connecting Iran to China overland, as documented by The Independent, on the belief that this will make a renewed naval blockade truly effective. But 3W notes none of this is of this of true strategic importance, and has not been tried and failed before. It will not change the fundamental equation, as set out by Kagan and Haas.
Therefore, at 3W we expect the current escalation to eventually as the US realizes its bombings do not change anything, other than close the Strait of Hormuz and make global economic collapse a major risk again. At that moment the US will offer new negotiations, as the US already stated hinting at, according to Bloomberg. But at that point, Israel will start working in the background again, pushing and shoving to prevent any kind of negotiated settlement between the US and Iran.
The “Slow Burning” phase will thus continue. Again.