|
“War is diplomacy by other means.” – Clausewitz.
|
Introduction: Nearly 20% of the world’s oil supply passes through the Strait of Hormuz. The conflict in this region has shaken the Global economy.
Relations between the US and Iran have been shaped by decades of mistrust since the Iranian Revolution (1979), which transformed the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East.
Causes: At the broadest level, the US-Iran conflict occurred because each sees the other as the main obstacle to its vision of the Middle East. The US wants to preserve a regional order built around allied Gulf monarchies, Israel, open sea lanes, and the prevention of any hostile power dominating the Gulf. Iran wants to resist US pressure, weaken American influence, deter Israel and the Gulf states, and preserve its regime and strategic depth. That makes confrontation structural, not accidental.
The US and Israel are fighting Iran due to decades of escalating tensions, primarily centred on Iran's nuclear program, its support for regional proxies (like Hezbollah and Houthis), its ballistic missile development, and its anti-Israel and anti-US rhetoric, culminating in recent military actions by the US and Israel on the 28th of February 2026, following collapsed nuclear talks and longstanding regional influence disputes.
Geopolitical aspects: The US seeks to maintain the security architecture that protects Israel and Gulf partners (Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Bahrain, & Iraq), as well as maritime trade. Iran seeks to break encirclement, deter external attack, and project influence through allied networks and strategic geography.
Religious aspects: Iran’s post-1979 state ideology is rooted in Shi’a Islamist revolutionary thought, which casts resistance to US influence and Israeli power as both a political duty and moral struggle. That worldview helps Tehran mobilise domestic and allied support (Russia & China, etc.). On the US side, the conflict is not a religious war in formal terms. Still, religion indirectly matters through America’s alignment with regional partners, especially states that fear Iran’s revolutionary message and support for Shi’a armed movements (Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthis in Yemen and Iraqi militias). So religion sharpens the conflict by turning ordinary power rivalry into a civilisational and moral struggle.
Economic Aspects: For the US, keeping Gulf energy routes open is a longstanding strategic and economic interest, even if the US is less dependent on Middle Eastern oil than in the past. For Iran, threatening shipping is one of the few ways it can impose global costs on stronger adversaries. In simple terms, Iran cannot match the US symmetrically in power, so it uses economic leverage through disruption. That is why oil terminals, export hubs, and shipping lanes have become central to the war.
Military Aspects: The US has overwhelming conventional air, naval, ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance), and precision-strike capabilities. At the same time, Iran follows the Mosaic Defence model (defending Iran through decentralised, locally controlled units that continue fighting even if the central command is damaged or destroyed). Iran has responded with missiles, drones, attacks across multiple countries (those supporting US military bases), and pressure on sea lanes.
Kharg Island is central to Iran’s oil system, as it hosts the main terminal overseeing the country’s oil exports. Roughly 90% of Iran's crude oil exports pass through Kharg Island, which has massive storage facilities and loading jetties capable of handling supertankers. The US “precision strikes” destroyed 90 military targets (mine storage sites, missile storage bunkers and several other military installations) while “preserving the oil infrastructure.” The US spared the oil infrastructure for someday rebuilding Iran.
Solutions: The solutions to the US-Iran war are a multi-layered strategy that involves immediate crisis management, medium-term negotiations, and long-term regional security arrangements, all necessary to achieve lasting peace. The conflict ends sustainably only if both sides get something vital. The US needs reduced nuclear and regional threats; Iran needs regime survival and relief from strangulation. Any solution that ignores either side’s core interest will probably fail.
- Diplomatic mediation through neutral states such as Oman (largely neutral and mediating)and Qatar (not neutral, but not a direct combatant either; it hosts US forces and leans toward the US security side while still trying to avoid escalation).
- Ceasefire and military restraint between both sides.
- Ensuring safe maritime navigation through the Strait of Hormuz through international naval Coordination.
- Establishing military communication channels to prevent accidental clashes.
Conclusion: The US–Iran conflict represents a complex interaction of geopolitical rivalry, ideological differences, and energy security concerns. Military confrontation alone cannot resolve these structural tensions. A phased approach combining diplomacy, economic cooperation, and regional security arrangements is essential to ensure long-term stability in West Asia and safeguard global energy flows.