“Today I am at the head of the strongest army in the world, the most gigantic air force, and of a proud navy; we shall only talk of peace when we have won the war,” Hitler boasted in 1940. While moving the American Armageddon in the vicinity of Iran, President Donald Trump was also frothing about the destructive power of the sole superpower in a bid to force Iranian leaders to surrender even before the deluge.

The geography and landmass of Iran, over 1.6 million square kilometres, of which 55 per cent consists of mountains, stand guard over this nation. It borders Iraq and Turkey to the west; Azerbaijan, Armenia, and Turkmenistan to the north; Afghanistan and Pakistan to the east. With this vast strategic depth, it has not been historically easy to subdue Iran, barring the military expedition of Alexander the Great and the Muslim military campaigns from 633 to 651 AD.

The war in South West Asia has gone into the third week, and there are no signs of a cessation of hostilities anytime soon. Iran’s clerical regime has survived notwithstanding the tragic loss of the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in the first wave of attacks, with the country’s retaliatory capacity intact and its strategic success to widen and prolong the war.

It has successfully frustrated the enemy’s plans to achieve its war objectives in a short and quick attack, as they had expected. These objectives included regime change, degradation of Iran’s missile production and launch capacity, capture of its enriched uranium, and control over its oil and gas resources.

Firstly, the USA and Israel must have realised that Iran is not a cakewalk. Iran, anticipating their hostility towards post-revolution regimes spanning over four decades, and particularly after the USA’s invasion of Iraq, had designed its defence strategy to fight a long and asymmetric war, defusing and decentralising the fighting forces, including the National Army and the IRGC, into units with weapons and lists of targets—to survive a sudden onslaught on its command and control or central nerve system and the decapitation of senior military hierarchy.

Secondly, human intelligence has limits. Technology-driven intelligence is a new phenomenon. Iran, being a vast country of mountainous landmass, has several tunnels deep into the mountains where its war arsenal is hidden, and missile-producing facilities are located, safe from the bombardment of the enemy. The defence arsenal of Iran, on the surface, may be a smaller portion of the weaponry concealed beneath lofty mountains spread over vast areas.

It seems the modern Genghis Khans did not take this secret world of Iran’s defence into consideration. Iran knew it could not match the air force of the enemy. Thus, it focused on the manufacturing of missiles, acquiring technology from all available sources.

There could be pressure on Pakistan too, as it did in the past against Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, with attention diverted to the Shamsi airbase

There could be pressure on Pakistan too, as it did in the past against Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, with attention diverted to the Shamsi airbase

Some credible reports suggest it has the capability of producing bulky stocks of relatively inexpensive missiles and drones without any pause. With defused defence forces and the continuous production of missiles and drones, Iran has the capacity to drag the war into several months.

Thirdly, as part of its defence strategy and to prolong the war, Iran targeted the USA military bases and assets in the Gulf States. For the sake of clarity, Iran made it plain that it was exercising its right of self-defence and attacking only the American military bases and assets, and that it had no enmity with these states. Iran rightly apprehended that these military bases would be used against it.

These attacks, pre-emptive in scope, achieved Iran’s strategic objectives: to force the Gulf States to stay away from the war-mongering madness of the modern Mongols and to prolong the war to tire out the mad enemy. Most Middle Eastern countries have already refused to allow the USA and Israel to use their airspace for attacks on Iran.

Fourthly, Iran has its biggest weapon, namely the choke point of the Strait of Hormuz, to strangle the global economy. The war has already sent the world economy into a tailspin, and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has disrupted the flow of one-fifth of the world’s oil supply.

The oil-dependent economy of the Gulf countries has been hit hard. The USA Navy, being focused on war, has refused to escort oil tankers passing through the Strait. President Donald Trump has reassured that Western warships would provide security to oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran could mine the waterway to maintain its closure.

There is the possibility of the USA-led Western countries taking over the waterway, similar to the occupation of the Suez Canal in the early 1950s. This would be the second serious escalatory action on the part of the USA after the provocative attacks on Iranian oil assets on Kharg Island.

As the war drags on, hitting the global economy and keeping the major powers on their toes, pressure has been building on the Trump administration both domestically and from Western and Middle Eastern allies to end the war. There have been strong voices from Congress and the Senate against this purposeless war and mad bloodletting.

Reports from the Pentagon, as quoted by the American media, have made it plain that there would be no chance of regime change or the possibility of achieving other war objectives without having troops on the ground. Easy said than done. The American leaders should not forget their abortive operation ‘Eagle Claw’ for the rescue of their hostages in 1979, which cost President Carter his second term in the White House. Today, Iran is different from the post-revolution chaotic conditions.

The Trump administration has been seriously planning to have troops on the ground in Iran. A contingent of some 2,000 US Marines could be shipped to control the Strait of Hormuz. The moot question is which country bordering Iran could provide facilities for the passage of soldiers into Iran.

Afghanistan is not on friendly terms with the USA. All the other bordering states have bilateral relations with the USA. However, every country would carefully weigh the pros and cons of such cooperation with invaders, risking retaliatory attacks from Iran. Azerbaijan has divergences with Iran over the oil and gas riches of the Caspian Sea. They had been involved in gunboat diplomacy in the past.

Armenia could be vulnerable to USA and Israeli pressure. There could be pressure on Pakistan too, as it did in the past against Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, with attention diverted to the Shamsi airbase. Pakistan would withstand the pressure for such cooperation against Iran.

The stationing of ground troops means the prolongation of the war into months and years, spelling disaster in South West Asia and the Middle East. Also, the possibility of the war morphing into a limited world war could not be ruled out, with China and Russia supporting Iran covertly or overtly to bog down the sole superpower for another humiliation after Afghanistan.

© The Friday Times