By Tom Fowdy
Ali Wyne, an analyst at the International Crisis group, told the Associated Press (AP), that Donald Trump's belief he could wipe out the Iranian regime with a "show of force" was meant to "intimidate Beijing" but "instead served to puncture the illusion of U.S. omnipotence: Unable to reopen the Strait of Hormuz alone, Washington now needs its principal strategic competitor to help it manage a crisis of its own making."
The comments came as Trump asked China for help in reopening the strait, a request that has already been refused by every single US ally. Beijing, despite feeling pressure on its own massive energy needs, naturally declined the request. Now, bogged down in the conflict, the President has now been forced to delay his much-anticipated trip to Beijing, where he would have undoubtedly sought to secure favourable trading arrangements for the United States. He is stuck in a major war of his own making, with no plan B, as Iran continues to hammer energy infrastructure across the region with drones and missiles.It is funny how perceptions in politics can change rapidly, unpredictably, and in a way that is completely relative. Only two months ago was the administration and its supporters were championing a narrative of unmatched American power as forces swept in and abducted Venezuelan President Nicholas Maduro without a fight, subjugating the South American socialist state to Washington's will. On the back of this, Taiwanese misinformation machines pushed convenient narratives that, despite the fragility of the Venezuelan state and obvious orders not to resist, Chinese air defences had failed to detect the attack.
The outcome of the Maduro raid, and these narratives, served to cement a self-affirming propaganda that the United States could easily topple its adversaries without blowback, and thus Trump became certain of his own invincibility. Once against "forever wars", Trump adjusted his mantra on the belief that if an operation was well planned, an enemy could be defeated without resorting to such a conflict. As a result, pushed by Israeli lobbying, the White House conjured up the hair brained plan that it could topple the Iranian state in the same way. Like Venezuela, it was obvious the administration believed the outcome would be swift, decisive and bring more critical energy resources into American control, thus formulating part of the National Security Strategy (NSS) in building economic leverage to project power.
Just shy of three weeks have now passed and it is beyond doubt that things have gone horribly wrong. Iran did not crumble; it dug in and retaliated on a scale few saw coming. Now, global energy prices are soaring, measures to reassure markets have failed, allies have distanced themselves and worse, Trump has even had to make sanctions concessions to Russia to try and control oil and gas prices, making Putin the biggest single financial benefactor of the fiasco. But more significantly, the war has demonstrated the limits of American capabilities and deterrence, ironically breaking not only Trump's, but a 36-year entrenched image of the United States as an undefeatable war machine.
How so? Even if Iran is the weaker party, and cannot win "outright", Tehran is the first country to be able to unleash serious retaliation against America and its allies since the Cold War era. The end of the Cold War, the Gulf Wars, as well as Russia's War in Ukraine, had created a belief system that the American military was in a league of its own and could easily destroy state-based (non-insurgent) opponents if they wished. Hence, Saddam Hussein was crushed in 1991 and 2003 without being able to inflict any serious losses on the US army. Here, however, Iran has struck dozens of US military bases, killed servicemen, destroyed expensive high-level equipment (forcing withdrawals from other regions), and shown that their air-defense systems are (ironically) not omniscient. This therefore leads us to question, if Iran, a poor country that has long been under significant sanctions is capable of all this, what would happen in a conflict against China, a much larger country, with much higher capabilities? Or even if Russia was forced to go all out?
Trump wanted to demonstrate American power, but all he has really managed to show here is that the US can barely take down a regional power, which is painfully ironic given all the chauvinism over Russia's ability to defeat Ukraine, and puts things into perspective. Thus regarding this conflict, as has been said many times (including by myself) Iran does not actually need to win outright but it simply needs to survive and drag the United States into enough of a quagmire that the whole thing becomes a humiliation. Trump doesn't have an exit strategy. He has essentially created another Vietnam War and it just boils down to when the US will finally take the loss and leave.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | South Korea finally learns the US is not the 'ironclad' ally it claims to be
Opinion | Why the US can never escape the Middle East Quagmire
Opinion | The vindication of North Korea
Opinion | Trump has made the biggest strategic mistake of his presidency
Comment