US-Israeli War on Iran: A Brief Round-up

[Sukla Sen]

In the early hours of Saturday, February 28, the United States and Israel launched a major attack on Iran, targeting a number of cities across the country. Iran vowed swift retaliation for the joint operation “Epic Fury," as labelled by the Pentagon, targeting U.S. interests and allies across the Middle East with missile attacks reported in Israel, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, as well as attacks targeting U.S. military facilities in Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain.

The US President himself defined this assault as “major combat operations".

Of the two launching this attack, one is one of by far the two largest nuclear powers in the world and the other one is the only nuclear weapons power in the region, even if undeclared. Not only that, it's also a non-signatory to an almost universally accepted global treaty that pertains to nuclear weapons and the grave existential danger that they pose to humanity. Like only India, Pakistan and, now, North Korea.

Rather paradoxically, a major declared aim of the attack is to eliminate the alleged, unproven, (future) nuclear threat posed by Iran.

The other aim of the war by Israel and America is, quite visibly, regime change in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

"When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take.” That's the US President's explicit message to Iranians.

Both Netanyahu and Trump are under tremendous popular pressure -- in Israel and the US.

The war is expected to shore up their positions in domestic politics.

Israel, the only nuclear weapons power in the region, now, apparently wants to install itself as the dominating power. Keeps receiving bountiful American support -- in terms of finance, arms and diplomatic support.

The US/Trump, in turn, is pushing for the elimination of political challenges in the region and letting Israel play the role of its attack dog with plenty of leeway.

Trump also wants to extend his business interests. And also that of the American big business.

Towards that, they would, in close collaboration, try to install a proxy regime in Iran.

(Not only the regime leaders, even possible legitimate democratic alternatives are, reportedly, being targeted.)

But, all at the same time, would try to eschew "boots on the ground". Body bags sent back home are highly resented in America. Even Israelis don't appreciate.

"Martyrdom" is not glorified.

A lot would thus depend on what happens in Iran domestically -- now under the impact of the attack.

For months together, Iran was experiencing massive popular protests. The issues affecting different sections are/were serious economic squeeze -- triggered by American economic sanctions -- and women's/democratic rights.

But, so far, the highly regressive and repressive regime has managed to quell the protests employing large-scale brutal coercion.

The issue is what happens now with the (second) Supreme Leader himself getting "martyred"?

Back in 2011, in Libya, a popular rebellion was being very much contained by the authoritarian regime by deploying its airpower. The former colonial ruler France -- at the head of NATO forces, opted to intervene in terms of providing air cover to the rebels. Neutralised the air superiority of the regime vis-a-vis the rebel army.

No boots on the ground though.

Nonetheless the regime got soon overrun and Col. Gaddafi on the run was hunted down.

Iranian opposition was, in contrast, very much using "democratic" methods.

It's pretty unlikely that there would be a Libya 2.0 in Iran.

In fact, within hours, Khamenei's replacement has been put in place.

His elimination has also caused an outpouring of grief on the streets.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards have vowed revenge.

However, Iran cannot really take on even Israel frontally, let alone America.

So, if, and as long as, the regime continues, it will resort to various forms of modified guerrilla tactics.

On the one hand, would try to hit, apart from Israel, American assets/interests spread over the region, American allies and block the adjoining sea route for oil transport to the outside world.

It would also likely activate its sleeper cells in "enemy countries". Encourage the Hamas and Hezbollah too to do something on those lines.

Hence, the issue remains how long the regime is going to survive?

Looks like its immediate collapse is not on the cards.

Of course, the global economy will take a palpable hit.

How serious is an uncertain quantity right at this point of time.

Even a global recession can hardly be ruled out.

Despite diplomatic moves, including issue of condemnatory statements, Russia and China are not expected to run the risk of involving themselves directly in an international war. If their past track records are any indication.

In case they do, a regional conflict cannot but dangerously escalate. A nuclear Armageddon threatening to blot out much of the life forms on this planet would be very much on the cards.

In the meanwhile, the UK, Germany and France have indicated readiness to join the fray -- even if only in a limited way.

[A process of lawlessness in international relations -- how the "strong" deal with the "weak", in flagrant violation of global norms brought into being to avert recurrence of the ruinous WW II -- was sort of inaugurated by Putin via the invasion of bordering Ukraine. It is the first major land war on the soil of Europe since the last World War -- preceded only by a far more limited Russian aggression against another neighbour Georgia.

Subsequently, Netanyahu's ongoing genocide in Gaza, weaponising the reprehensible attack by Hamas on Israeli civilian population, took it to quite another level. And it did not remain limited to Gaza alone. Lebanon and Yemen came under high-profile attacks. So did Syria and then Iran.

Arguably the ugliest demonstration of "raw power" was then the publicly trumpeted kidnapping of the Venezuelan President and his wife by the US under Trump.

Now, this war on Iran.

To be sure, Trump is also talking of takeover of Greenland and now even Cuba!

(Just think of it that a section of the American Left had projected Trump as the "Peace Candidate" during his first bid for presidency!)]

To sum up, while air power can destroy a country, it's rather inadequate to reorder domestic politics in that country.

So, the developments in the coming days would depend a lot on what happens within Iran. On how different sections of Iranian people respond to the current situation.

In any case, the world appears to be descending into an era of jungle raj where the more powerful ones are armed with nuclear weapons.

A sure recipe for a huge disaster?

[Please also look up: 

I. <https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/mar/01/trump-us-iran-war-history>.

II. <https://www.instagram.com/reel/DVTgYKDkhG4/>.

III. <https://jacobin.com/list/campaign/cam:v0t4g4>.

Peace Is Doable