the geopolitical repercussions of the Iran war are likely to be more far-reaching than those of the invasion of Iraq.

 Trita Parsi

 ·

Follow

noestdoprS5c6l747fg4m2i51hf21999mi0l1giicuit4uc33mftu24gg82m ·

I write in the @theipaper that the geopolitical repercussions of the Iran war are likely to be more far-reaching than those of the invasion of Iraq.

In Iraq, the US at least won the war militarily in three weeks, only to lose the peace later. In Iran, the US has lost not just the peace but the war itself.

This raises significant question marks as to whether US global primacy is feasible anymore. If a country like Iran can not only deny the US victory but impose on it a strategic defeat through the use of technology and geography, it is not only the reliability of America's security umbrella that comes under question, but also its efficiency.

These repercussions will not be limited to the Middle East alone, but will likely be felt globally.

What emerges instead is arguably a different kind of global order: one not defined by dominance but by mutual denial. In this world, great powers cannot simply impose their will, and smaller states can resist them at tolerable costs. The result is not chaos, but constraint.

The danger for the US is not irrelevance. It’s that it continues to pursue a strategy designed for a world that no longer exists. The same is true for countries, like the UK, that have largely chosen to rely on American military dominance. American hegemony promised control, but the Iran war revealed the limitations of American power.

In the gap between promise and reality lies the likely end of an era. The winners will ultimately be those who adjust.