Iran and Israel's Shared Interests Prolong War, Leaving US Stymied

Middle East Conflict: A Complex Web of Objectives

Overview

The ongoing conflict in the Middle East has entered its third week, with no resolution in sight. The parties involved, Israel, the US, and Iran, have differing objectives that are driving the conflict forward.

US Objectives and Challenges

Read also: Treasury Yields Experience Largest Increase in Two Weeks Following Release of Labor Market Data

The US initially expected a quick victory in the conflict, but its miscalculations have led to a prolonged and costly war. The successful removal of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela led the Americans to believe that a similar operation could be replicated in Iran. However, the Iranian regime has survived and struck back at US and Israeli interests across the Middle East. As the war drags on, Trump faces growing pressure to find an exit strategy, but a hasty retreat would be seen as a sign of defeat.

The US is now considering an opportunity to "declare" victory and push for negotiations. The deployment of US Amphibious Assault Ships towards the region is an indication of this strategy. Taking control of Kharg Island or damaging the oil infrastructure on it would help Trump claim victory and then push for negotiations.

Israeli Objectives and Strategy

In contrast, Israel is prepared for a longer battle, with maximalist objectives that include degrading Iran's military and economic capabilities to the point where they cease to be a threat. This is similar to what has happened in Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. Israel's operation to take down Ali Larijani highlights this objective, making it less likely for negotiations to occur in the short-term.

Read also: US-Iran Tensions Spark Uptick in Oil Prices Amid Global Market Decline

Iranian Strategy and Leverage

Iran is playing for time, aware that mere survival is a sign of victory. The regime knows that time is not on the US' side, as the war drags on and Trump faces growing pressure to find an exit strategy. Iran also has leverage on the global economic system, as the Strait of Hormuz is a vital chokepoint. The longer it is blocked, the higher the global economic costs of the war.

Iran has demonstrated near-total control over the Strait of Hormuz, attacking ships passing through and pushing back against any US outreach for negotiations. This strategy indicates that Iran is willing to drag the war on for longer and increase the economic costs.

Conclusion

The complex web of objectives and strategies between the US, Israel, and Iran makes it challenging to find a resolution to the conflict. The diverging objectives and strategies will likely continue to drive the conflict forward, with no clear end in sight.

Key Figures and Terms

• Israel: A key player in the conflict, with maximalist objectives that include degrading Iran's military and economic capabilities.
• US: Faces growing pressure to find an exit strategy, but a hasty retreat would be seen as a sign of defeat.
• Iran: Playing for time, aware that mere survival is a sign of victory and has leverage on the global economic system.
• Trump: Faces growing pressure to find an exit strategy, but is considering an opportunity to "declare" victory and push for negotiations.
• Kharg Island: A strategic location that could be used to claim victory and push for negotiations.
• Strait of Hormuz: A vital chokepoint that Iran has demonstrated near-total control over.
• Ali Larijani: The Iranian politician who was killed in an Israeli operation, highlighting Israel's maximalist objectives.