More than a week of Iran attacks on vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, followed by US strikes and Iranian retaliation has left much of the Middle East on tenterhooks. The painstaking diplomatic work that resulted in a 14-point agreement to de-escalate the months-long conflict is being challenged as missiles and drones hit bridges, roads and desalination plants on both sides of the Arabian Gulf.
This latest wave of confrontation between Washington and Tehran is encompassing targets from Jordan to Oman. Worryingly, there are clear warning signs of more red lines being crossed. Repeated Iranian attacks on Kuwait’s water and power networks, and unrelenting American strikes inside Iran, suggest a war that is breaking through previously understood limits.
As Iran says it is formally abandoning the memorandum of understanding and at least two US personnel in Jordan are killed, realistic political objectives in this conflict are difficult to discern. The US has failed to halt Iran’s disruption of regional security, including its threats to shipping around the Strait of Hormuz. Iran is unable to effectively defend its airspace, break its international isolation or secure a meaningful reprieve for its beleaguered leadership. Instead, each strike is presented as retaliation for what went before, leading to a profound sense of strategic drift.
The result is a dangerous state best characterised as “no war, no peace”. Objectives are not met but costs are absorbed not only by the warring parties but other countries in the region. This situation is unsustainable and demands a swift resolution.
Sadly, the diplomatic approach that has been tried so far has been found wanting, as more than a week of tit-for-tat strikes shows. Although back-channel communication is reportedly ongoing, a change of direction is needed. Actors with influence and credibility must try harder to make their presence felt. The UN, too often reduced to the role of observer, must reassert itself. Russia and China have real channels of influence in Tehran. Even Gulf states that have been attacked by Tehran still have a role to play.
Trying to solve everything at once leads only to diplomatic overland. A more realistic pathway could begin with a time-bound truce focused on stopping any more destruction of civilian infrastructure. A sequenced process of de-escalation with the involvement of independent third-party monitors could follow. Negotiations could also be divided into manageable tracks – nuclear issues, military tensions and regional proxy conflicts should be negotiated.
The greatest danger now is that the region’s stability is being sacrificed in a confrontation driven by the US-Iran rivalry and a widening cycle of retaliation. The Gulf countries, Iraq and Jordan are absorbing the consequences of unchecked escalation. Who “wins” the next exchange is not the relevant question – it is whether anyone can stop a war that that is gradually escaping the control of those waging it.
