By Nabiha Ahad
The world saw strategically miscalulated decapitation strikes on Iran by US. And now after three and half months and a temporary ceasefire, the peace table is going to be set at Geneva tomorrow. This paradox has raised brows about Trump’s tweet in 2020, that “Iran has never won a war yet never lost negotiations” , and credibility of US foreign policy calculus. Since long US has been chest thumping about flipping the Iranian theocratic regime. The mission was doomed since day one. The objectives behind the war of choice were being changed continuously. Once it was about to save Iranians from an autocratic regime, then it turned to curb Iran’s nuclear capabilities. But as usual, the US expectation that military pressure will translate into compliance went wrong.
The gap between tactical and strategic success is evident here. Though the military strikes by US have proven effective in removal of the top leadership of Iran, but the political outcomes it intended for still remain uncertain. The US belief that application of force will give it negotiation leverage with Iran was not flawless. It ignored the inevitability of negotiations which wars are unable to escape now. Its assumption is undermined by the limitation of decapitation that removal of individuals does not mean collapse of institutions. Iranian system survives through organizational durability, martyrdom effects and inadvertent decentralization. Hence, the US adventure has not untied the knot of perceived issues but have only increased the cost of their resolution.
All the misadventures since the last year have only accelerated the decline in monopoly of US security guarantees. This is evident through the mutual defense agreement between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan which was signed after Israeli attack on Qatar , one of the members of Gulf Cooperation Council, within a matter of weeks. US appears to have lost the command of global commons. This erosion of US dominance has expanded the space for diplomacy in the Middle East power paradox for non-Western diplomatic actors which focus on global connectivity and not security guarantees. This space is the strategic leverage China enjoys. It does not intervene but capitalizes on the instability US creates.
This is an irony of 2026 escalation episode that war was not the end of strategic ambitions. The adversaries have now returned to the table. The timelines may be altered by military moves but after all, diplomacy is the last resort in the multipolar world. Though one can hardly expect a full fledge normalization after the upcoming deal at Geneva as the answered questions about the status of Strait of Hormuz and the fate of Iranian nuclear program are deferred. The air of Geneva will decide whether the deterrence instrument of Iran and the US military might will ease the peace process or further complicate it.
Also Read: Deal faces obstacles
Today's E-Paper