Every war begins with a declared objective, but very few end with one. Somewhere between the first missile and the thousandth funeral, objectives give way to compulsions, strategy yields to survival, and the pursuit of victory is quietly replaced by the determination not to lose. That is where the West Asian conflict finds itself today.

The collapse of the latest understanding between the United States and Iran has surprised only those who mistook a pause for a settlement. The memorandum that briefly raised hopes of a reduction in tensions has dissolved under the weight of realities that neither side was prepared to abandon.

American forces continue to strike Iranian assets, Iran continues to demonstrate that it can impose costs on American bases and commercial shipping, Israel has resumed military operations with renewed intensity, and the Houthis have once again become active participants in a conflict that has steadily expanded far beyond its original geography.

The Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant share of the world's energy supplies must pass, has become less a shipping lane than a theatre of strategic messaging. The instinctive response is to ask where all this is headed. But the more appropriate question is whether it is headed anywhere at all.

Also Read: From chokepoints to strategic stalemate

For decades, every major conflict in the region has been accompanied by elaborate discussions about peace. Diplomats have flown across continents, summits have been convened, declarations have been signed, and photographs have been taken with carefully choreographed optimism. Yet the region has repeatedly demonstrated that peace is not merely the absence of war. It is the presence of political conditions that make war unnecessary. And those conditions simply do not exist today.

The........

© Mathrubhumi English