‘Epic fail’: Sleepwalking into WWIII?
Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth,” counseled the great boxer Mike Tyson. Or, in the words of the 19th-century Prussian strategist Helmuth von Moltke, who oversaw arguably the world’s first professional army: “No plan survives the first contact with the enemy.”
In the middle of yet another round of negotiations, the United States launched attacks on Iran. The opening hours saw major tactical gains, including the elimination of top security officials in Tehran. In “The Art of War,” Sun Tzu emphasized the importance of signaling, especially when faced with aggressive adversaries: “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.” The problem, however, is that Tehran did almost the reverse: it adopted intransigent rhetoric coupled with a rapidly expanding nuclear and ballistic missile production program, which allowed rivals to easily portray it as a hegemonic threat. But when under actual attack, the regime adopted strategic caution, relying on calibrated and symbolic responses. This was clearly (mis)interpreted by adversaries as a sign of weakness, if not a fatal vulnerability. The collapse of the Assad regime in Syria and the seamless removal of Maduro in Venezuela sealed the deal.
Whereas previously a war with Iran was rationalized on type one error (preventing a supposedly hegemonic Iran), the temptation was now to fall for type two error (Iran is too weak). Within 48 hours, however, it became clear that the Iranian regime was no ”paper tiger.” With hardline figures now fully in charge, the regime shifted to a strategy of “credible commitment”: signaling willingness to rapidly escalate to reestablish deterrence and, ideally, create conditions for a more balanced settlement in the future, risking short-term “irrationality” for long-term rational returns.
Over the past week, the regime has managed to target almost a dozen nations with ballistic missiles and drones. Reports suggest massive damage to American bases across the region, including billion-dollar radar systems and interceptors. Some data suggest more than a 50 percent penetration rate, with more than 140 strikes piercing through the world’s most sophisticated defense systems in the first five days of war.
The Iranian regime also managed to de facto shut down the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf with the sheer threat of strikes. Oil prices could breach way past $100 per barrel in the coming hours. Gulf sheikhdoms are struggling to export hydrocarbon goods, with food and water resources potentially reaching perilous levels in the near future. With the US and allies rapidly exhausting their interceptors, the Iranian regime could move to deploy more sophisticated missiles, including hypersonic variants, and more lethal drones. Its proxies are also stepping up operations, especially in Iraq and Lebanon, with Houthis potentially joining the next phase of escalation. If current trends continue, the global economy could tip into recession.
Worst of all, thousands more civilians could fall victim—from Jerusalem to Tehran—hundreds of children were killed and injured in Iran in the opening days of the war. By now, it must have become clear to the world that the Iranian regime is less like Saddam Hussein’s or Venezuela’s but more like Vietnam’s. A mosaic defense strategy has allowed regional commanders to oversee daily operational decisions, while power is dispersed across a web of interlocking power centers backed by hundreds of thousands of ideologically committed armed forces. Home to the world’s fifth-largest population of engineers, with among the top science, technology, engineering and mathematics universities outside the West, Iran has amassed and can build a massive number of advanced missiles and drones. Sensing a chance to bleed the West, Russia and China are also gradually pitching in, providing logistics and intelligence support to Tehran.
Since regime change remains unlikely, the temptation for adversaries is to shift to dismembering the Iranian nation-state via massive bombardment of critical infrastructure and major cities, as well as the funding of separatist groups as a backup option. State collapse in Iran could lead to millions of casualties and a global migration crisis—a black hole in the heart of Eurasia. Nevertheless, a negotiated settlement is not impossible. “Regime transformation” is one possibility, similar to how postwar Vietnam shifted into a nonaggression pact with hostile superpowers while maintaining its strategic independence through robust defense spending and global trade. But in the absence of reasonable diplomacy, there is just as much risk that, especially if the war continues with growing ugliness and intensity, Iran might transmogrify into a giant North Korea.
—————-
richard.heydarian@inquirer.net
