The realists gave me a hard time when I defined WAR as Waste of Available Resources. They reminded me of Chanakya Kautilya, Niccolò Machiavelli, Carl von Clausewitz, and many other academics and practitioners who viewed war as an instrument of policy. Whereas I insisted on Sun Tzu’s precepts that one should aim to win the war without fighting, and inspired by him, I stated that one should win wars by other means. What I was suggesting was a competition for excellence instead of violence that will only bring deaths, destruction, devastation, displacement, and divisions (D5).
Another aspect I have insisted on since early 2024 is that we are in World War II, and it could expand further with slight miscalculations or technological malfunctions. Unfortunately, this was also rejected. On both accounts, I have proven correct. The war in the Middle East, if it continues, has the potential to spread to other regions with the prospect of the use of nuclear weapons, even if the probability is low, but the possibility exists.
Coming back to the title, one has carefully analysed the objectives of the stakeholders in this deadly war between Iran, Israel, and the U.S. Apparently, Iran is fighting for its civilizational survival. Israel is vying to establish a Greater Israel, and the U.S. is trying to maintain its position as the sole superpower. These are just the vital ones, and each stakeholder could have many strategic, operational, and tactical objectives.
Iran had warned the U.S. that if it attacks Iran from its bases in the Middle East, then they will become its legitimate targets even if they are located in brotherly Muslim states.
Now, each of them has to pay the price to achieve their respective objectives. Since Iran is faced with an existential threat, it is paying with lives and property, i.e. D5. Since the first attacks by Israel and the U.S. on February 28, 2026, in which the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and his close family member were martyred, Iran has received thousands of tons of bombs on its military, commercial, and civilian installations. Even the schools were not spared, and the most tragic loss was when over 160 female students with their teachers were martyred due to Israeli bombings.
Israel, on the other hand, is paying the price differently. The country was considered impregnable and undefeatable. However, Iranians have surprised them this time with a variety of surface-to-surface missiles and uncrewed combat aerial vehicles (UCAVs), and small killer drones. The diversity and frequency of Iranian attacks have stressed Israeli air defence systems, and several incoming missiles and drones have been able to hit their intended targets successfully. Since Israel was not expecting such a response from Iran, the government and the people appeared unprepared, and hence, panic set in. Iran has successfully targeted their military, economic, commercial, and energy targets, making them realise that the time has changed.
As far as the U.S. is concerned, it’s not a new player in the region. As a sole superpower since 1991, the U.S. has been all over the world. However, Iran is proving a lot more different this time than any of its victims before. Apparently, Israel forced the U.S. to join in its war on Iran, and since the Americans do not read Sun Tzu in those details, they did not adhere to his golden precepts, “Know your enemy and know yourself.” Through my writings, TV programmes, and social media platforms, I kept on reminding them that Iran is neither Iraq nor Libya; it’s an old and proud civilisation, and its people know the value of independence and sovereignty. However, as usual, people do not take these cautionary notes seriously.
The U.S. leadership and its military are now being tested like never before, and that too within the first two weeks of the war. Iran has not only surprised the world with its capabilities but also with its resolve. Iran had warned the U.S. that if it attacks Iran from its bases in the Middle East, then they will become its legitimate targets even if they are located in brotherly Muslim states. No sooner than the Israeli and U.S. strikes killed the Iranian Supreme Leader, Iran reacted sharply against the U.S. military installations in all the Gulf countries.
Perhaps the U.S. and the Gulf leaders did not expect that Iran would resort to such retaliation against U.S. interests on their soil. Iran did not retaliate, but with precision and lethality that the Gulf states did not anticipate.
While I am not supporting Iranian strikes on brotherly countries, even if it is against the U.S. interests, because the chances of misfires onto friendly targets cannot be ruled out. Due to the paucity of space, I will stop here but continue in Part II with details about the closure and impact on the Strait of Hormuz.
(To Be Concluded)
The writer of this article has authored four international books: Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan, South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace, Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War, and Diplomacy and Deterrence.