Courtesy: Gateway House
The West Asian conflict is raising questions about Iran’s performance. Tehran appeared well-prepared, having expanded its low-cost drone and missile capabilities. It also widened the conflict by targeting U.S. bases in the Gulf. The key lesson is that eliminating leadership does not guarantee regime change. The conflict underscores that modern warfare depends not just on battlefield gains, but also on economic resilience, trade leverage, and technological strength.
Courtesy: AFP
The U.S.–Israel war against Iran will alter the geopolitical landscape of West Asia and adversely impact the global economy, including India. Vali Nasr, Majid Khadduri Professor of International Affairs and Middle East Studies at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies, analyses the conflict and its implications in an exclusive conversation with Nayanima Basu.
Courtesy: Gateway House
Early indicators of the ongoing war in West Asia point to a conflict trajectory from the rapid decision to the controlled escalation to distributed strike capacity, advanced military integration and mounting regional exposure. Much like Johann Goethe’s Sorcerer’s Apprentice, conflicts initiated based on assumptions of control can acquire a momentum of their own.
Courtesy: Shutterstock
The U.S. and Israel launched precise airstrikes on Iran, targeting nuclear facilities and senior leadership. Their aim is to weaken Iran’s nuclear programme and potentially induce regime change, while Tehran’s priority remains regime survival. The conflict’s duration will depend on whether it remains limited to missile exchanges or escalates into asymmetric warfare.
Courtesy: Gateway House
Iran has often stood at the crossroads of social and political metamorphosis and regional geopolitical recalibration, from the Islamic Revolution of 1979 to the attrition of the Iran-Iraq War. The current landscape reflects the convergence, once again, of internal pressures and sharper deterrence postures, that the social compact—from a Lockean and Rousseauian perspective—needs a new edition, and that timely diplomacy to prevent escalation is required.
Courtesy: AFP
The arc of revolutions has two acts: rupture - upending the status quo - and the craft of repair. Often, the second is as hard as the first. Today's Pax Fragilis in Gaza is narrow, given the continuing humanitarian crisis, regional reactiveness, limited scope of de-escalation channels, multiple actors' motivations for a permanent ceasefire, and the capabilities of Israel and Palestine to build a pathway with certainty.
Courtesy: Foreign Affairs
Countries in the Middle East, such as Iran, Israel or Saudi Arabia, do not want a military confrontation. Yet, current circumstances conduce to the breaking out of just such a war
Courtesy: Dawn Endico
Today ISIS is the gravest international security threat. To defeat ISIS, the world should pay heed to India’s experience of the need to isolate state sponsors of terrorism. Ultimately, only when Saudi Arabia acknowledges the danger to its own survival from past policies of alleged support to extremist groups, can it be a reliable partner in the fight against ISIS.
Courtesy: Wikipedia
The announcement in June of a Saudi-Israeli alliance against Iran has to be seen in the context of the strategic dimensions of India’s relations with Saudi Arabia, Israel, Iran, and the U.S. And it has far-reaching implications for India’s policy towards West Asia
Courtesy: U.S. Staff Sergeant Aaron Allmon
Obama’s strategy to target the IS in Syria within the framework of a U.S.-led international coalition has met with a tepid response. There are reports that the U.S may offer India a non-NATO ally status during Modi’s upcoming visit in a bid to seek greater support – a gesture that India will do well to disregard.