War is sometimes about giving up without losing face.
The United States has been involved in the Ukraine conflict since it began in 2014, and even before that. Kiev has been part of NATO’s attempts to expand towards Russia, despite Western powers promising not to expand eastwards.
It is interesting to see a constantly growing defence alliance. Anyone unfamiliar with the background history could easily misinterpret this as ‘imperialism’, which is the term we use when a superpower spreads its sphere of influence over new areas.
Regardless of how we interpret NATO’s constant growing pains – at present, Ukraine appears to be a lost cause – the Russians are making small but steady advances in a protracted war of attrition.
Is the conflict in the Middle East actually a way for the US to leave Ukraine with its honour intact?
If Ukraine falls, Trump can sadly declare that they cannot supply several countries with military resources at the same time, that they had to choose, that the situation in the Middle East was worse, with fabricated nuclear threats from Iran, and that they were forced to shift their military focus.
But even if they change the theatre of war, will the US be able to help the Israelis?
The goal is probably not a new protracted war, where hundreds of thousands of young American soldiers are shipped to the Middle East to die in yet another meaningless conflict. Trump probably wants to go for a quick strike and then withdraw victoriously. Such a strike could be to bomb the Iranian nuclear research labs. The problem is that they are located about 90 metres below ground in bedrock. Not even nuclear weapons can penetrate such targets.
The Americans also have a type of missile that can penetrate rock, known as a ‘bunker buster’, but it only goes to a depth of about 60 metres, and this enormous weapon has to be flown in by bomber aircraft, and the only aircraft currently capable of doing so is the B-2 Spirit. And such an expedition requires the Americans to have air superiority. Otherwise, the expensive bomber and its cargo will be shot down. And it would probably require repeated bombings to possibly knock out the Iranian nuclear research facilities.
It is difficult to send in troops and conquer the country, either wholly or in part. Iran is a huge nation with 90 million inhabitants. Continuing with conventional bombing of strategic targets may force the Iranians to give up, but it could also result in a never-ending war. It is not certain that we will achieve regime change; a nation under attack tends to stick together. Dropping a few atomic bombs, as was done in Japan, and forcing the country to surrender is, of course, also an option, but the world’s image of the United States and Israel would be shattered, and we would enter extremely dangerous times with a third world war looming.
If we disregard for a moment that Iran is ruled by a dictatorial clergy that censors and harasses its inhabitants, and instead consider the geopolitical situation. The country is important for BRICS cooperation. It is a passage between East and West, but also between South and North, with ports on the Pacific Ocean. It is important for the Chinese and Russians to maintain good relations with Iran. There are already rumours of Chinese transport planes landing in the country with some kind of supplies or materials. Otherwise, the other superpowers have kept a fairly low profile.
There is also an increasing chance that nothing will happen, that the US will not arrive in time, that Israel and Iran will meet at the negotiating table, and that both countries will continue with their respective nuclear research programmes, either completely or partially in secret.
Photo depicting the loading of a MOP, from Wikipedia.
