Muhammad Usman
WITH killing of an influential Iranian General Qasem Soleimani in a precision drone strike by US, tension, ever present in ME has soared incalculably, prompting fears of Third World War in the region. The toxic threats of cosmic proportions are being hurled by top leadership of both countries to unnerve each other in rat-tat mode. US has arrogantly threatened that it would hit 52 Iranian sites including its cultural sites very fast and hard if Tehran attacks Americans and US assets. US wants no more threats. Iranian insults are intolerable. In response, Iran has also shot back with equal ferocity. If US strikes any of Iranian cultural sites than for sure, no American military staff, no American political centre, no American military base and no American vessel would remain safe. The heart of US “Tel Aviv” is also on our sight.
The blockage of Strait of Hormuz would remain no more a distant possibility; one of the world’s most strategically important chock points nevertheless, in midst of ominously thundering clouds, a blinking silver lining could also be seen to moderate fast escalating crisis before situation spins out of control to the detriment of extreme interests of both. This may halt deteriorating situation, short of a full-fledged war. Probably in trade of threats, both see possibility to deescalate the explosive situation by raising stakes in advance. Such a thought is not product of some altruism or benevolent intensions but rigors of time and circumstances compel them to tread the path cautiously. Both are using “if” more than when in their dangerous, reckless and irrational outbursts against each other however, Iran is under crying need or terrible pressure of retaliation to redeem its injured pride and confidence. Their spiritual leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has promised revenge of slain General hence, more violence by Iran may be seen in areas across Middle East and beyond where Iran has operatives.
These include intensified proxy battles in Yemen against Saudi Arabia, in Lebanon and Syria against Israel, against US forces in Iraq and elsewhere. Besides, world may also see sporadic calculated attacks on oil tankers/oil facilities in the Gulf. The cyber warfare is another dimension. The revoking of nuclear deal was imminent. This was more of an act to the gallery than substance to uplift spirit of people at crunch time. Iran has done it as expected. Essentially Iran would respond with maximum resistance but could ill-afford a casus belli to US for an open war. The eventual outcome would be increased instability in the region. This would give US reason to bolster its presence in the area along with new opportunities for its arms sale to countries, dependent on US for security at exorbitant prices. In brief, an all-out war may seem improbable if situation for both countries is taken into cognizance.
Domestically Trump and his administration is likely to face opposition by people as well as parliamentarians against all-out conflict with Iran. Some people are already on roads. The Congress is contemplating a resolution to limit the conflict. The impeachment move against Trump, might have tempted him to take the plunge for temporary relief but its political cost may prove too high as all along, he has vociferously preached against it. Not long ago rather more recently in October last year when announcing a drawback in US forces in Syria he said “let someone else fight over this long bloodstained land”. His preamble to instant action would haunt him that it was taken to stop the war, not to start the war. In an unexpected move, Iraqi Parliament has asked US to leave Iraq under irresistible public pressure. The clarion call was that if Parliament does not vote to expel US troops, they will see true face of Iraqi streets. The sentiments of such disapproval, denunciation and anger may not remain confined to Iraq only. US has two vital interests in the ME; Israel and oil. It is a complex puzzle to solve, whether both interests are better served in state of no war, no peace in the region or by war with Iran. With presence of Iranian threat to the region, enhanced US’s arm sale is an icing on the cake.
Iran continues to challenge US quite successfully on strength of an assumption that though US could harm them but also has the vulnerabilities which Iran could exploit to compensate for its inadequacies militarily with greater reliance on morale and resilience of its people, revolutionary appeal, strategic location and oil however, appears to be mindful of the fact that in open direct conflict, it has no match with awesome power which US possesses militarily and politically. Given conditions, unlike its invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, US is constrained to make a moral case against Iran provided it does not play with fire, inflaming peace in the region. It could only make indirect and unconventional responses which does not raise the temperature to boiling point. Last but not the least, thought of a world war in age of globalization is too forbidding, not only for region but also globally. Precisely this is the reason that by and large, all countries are counselling peace to both. It is satisfying to note that Pakistan has also decided not to become party to conflict but partner in peace however, in world politics, words need to be backed by appropriate force to insulate itself against ensuing negative fallout otherwise retraction remains around the corner.
— The writer, a retired Lt Col, is freelance columnist based in Islamabad.
