There are moments in international politics when the choreography of war becomes visible before the curtain officially rises. Aircraft carriers reposition. Bases quietly empty. Diplomats talk faster, if not more honestly. The current U.S. military posture towards Iran suggests such a moment. The Pentagon is not improvising; it is staging. And when a superpower stages, it usually does so with more than one script in hand.

Yet the central question is not how the United States could strike Iran. It is why—and to what end. American history is littered with wars in which tactical brilliance outpaced strategic clarity. From Vietnam to Iraq, the United States has learned, relearned, and then inconveniently forgotten that military action untethered from clear political objectives tends to age badly. Iran risks becoming the next chapter in that familiar story.

Pakistan, Uzbekistan reaffirms commitment to deepening strategic economic Partnership at 10th IGC session

The signs of preparation are hard to ignore. A carrier strike group steaming towards the Middle East. Patriot and THAAD missile defences deployed. Non-essential personnel pulled from exposed bases in Qatar and Saudi Arabia. Tanker aircraft and heavy transport planes moving into theatre. This is not the posture of a power expecting imminent diplomacy. It is the posture of a power clearing the battlefield.

Iran, for its part, is not passive. Arms shipments from Russia and China suggest anticipation, not surprise. Tehran has stockpiled weapons and upgraded its air defences, including Chinese HQ-9B systems. On paper, these defences look formidable. In practice, they are less so. Modern........

© The Nation