View from Washington: Iran – A war at the wrong time and place

As the war in Iran continues and analysts debate how long it will last and what the outcome might be, this conflict is reshaping the security landscape in MENA and beyond, shifting the global balance of power.

In simple terms, the decision by Israel and the United States to launch a bombing campaign against Iran has already influenced great power dynamics in other critical regions. Most importantly, it has changed the main lines of confrontation between the U.S. and the “Axis of Dictatorships” — China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea.

If the conflict continues to fester and expand, it could trigger a chain reaction in other theaters and ultimately lead to a wider system-transforming war, writes military ‘19fortyfive’ site.

The wrong war at the wrong time

Statesmanship in world affairs requires identifying clear national interests and setting priorities for geostrategic goals. In 1951, General Omar Bradley criticized General Douglas MacArthur for wanting to expand the Korean War into China, saying it would be “the wrong war, at the wrong place, at the wrong time, and with the wrong enemy.”

Bradley and President Truman believed that escalating the conflict with communist China would divert resources from the main threat — the Soviet Union in Europe — and could even ignite World War III. While it’s possible to overanalyze historical comparisons, today’s U.S. campaign against Iran echoes Bradley’s criticism of MacArthur. Iran is undoubtedly a sworn enemy of the United States, but the current focus in the Middle East is shifting U.S. attention and resources away from securing the Western Hemisphere, the Indo-Pacific, and Europe — the three key regions outlined in the 2025 National Security Strategy.

America’s own strategy ranks the Middle East fourth

The NSS released by the Trump administration last fall ranks the Middle East fourth among U.S. priorities, behind the Western Hemisphere, Asia, and Europe. The NSS states that “the days in which the Middle East dominated American foreign policy in both long-term planning and day-to-day execution are thankfully over—not because the Middle East no longer matters, but because it is no longer the constant irritant, and potential source of imminent catastrophe, that it once was.”

Yet, today, it is precisely the Middle East that takes up an increasingly large share of U.S. military resources, narrowing the margin for error in other regions, especially in the Atlantic and Pacific, the two critical theaters. 

Today, we face an increasingly unstable global security situation, with four key regional balances at play — two main ones in Europe and the Indo-Pacific, and two secondary ones in the Middle East and the Korean Peninsula. Europe and the Middle East are beginning to unravel as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shattered the last remnants of the rules and norms that Europe claims to still follow.

Meanwhile, the United States is now engaging Iran, potentially turning a simmering conflict into a protracted full-scale war. To keep up with the pace of the campaign, the Pentagon has had to pull AMD systems from other theaters, weakening deterrence there and giving Russia, China, and North Korea an opportunity to test U.S. security guarantees.

The Atlantic and Pacific will decide America’s future, not the Middle East

Historically, the United States has been slow to enter global conflicts, suffering the fewest casualties and being best positioned to influence postwar political settlements. Over the past two decades, our strategists have seemed to overlook the costs of large-scale military operations, especially in secondary theaters. The future standing of the American Republic in the world will depend on its power position in the Atlantic and Pacific theaters, not in the Middle East.

Unlike during the Cold War, when our leaders always asked not whether they had the power and resources to launch military action, but whether they should and what the potential consequences might be, since 9/11we have used the military against threats that often did not directly threaten vital U.S. interests.

It is true that Iran is a gangster state seeking regional dominance in the Middle East, but it is also true that without Russian and Chinese support, it will not succeed.

So, to paraphrase Omar Bradley, this war could perhaps be seen as a proxy war against the “right enemies,” but it is being waged at the wrong time and in the wrong theater. 

...What's important in this commentary from an American military publication is the frankness with which Russia and China are named as the United States' main military adversaries. This is what we will proceed from, despite Washington's vocal commitment to negotiations with Moscow and Beijing. What does the United States intend to discuss with its enemies?

So, the longer the US squabbles with Iran, the less strength it will have left to fight on other fronts.

Or, perhaps, it would be better to make peace and live in peace?

read more in our Telegram-channel https://t.me/The_International_Affairs