Tehran, Iran. The 2026 Iran war has escalated from what was described as a local regime-change effort into a broader crisis, with disruptions in energy supplies and warnings of longer-term economic fallout. Analysts say the conflict is reshaping geopolitics in the Middle East and beyond, while highlighting risks for smaller states such as Cyprus.
Background to US intervention and Iran policy
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States emerged as the sole superpower, and its interventions in the Middle East increased, driven by neoconservative regime-change policies. Following 9/11, the Pentagon reportedly targeted seven countries for intervention, starting with Iraq and ending with Iran, and analysts say the aim was to destabilise the region to extend US influence. Declassified documents have identified regime change as a policy driver.
Israel’s security concerns and the JCPOA
US interventions are described as having largely failed, with regimes such as Iran’s adapting and becoming harder to topple. Israel has tended to view a wealthier, less restricted Iran as a security threat, with Israeli leaders preferring limitations on Iran’s uranium enrichment over lifting sanctions and consistently favouring military action, particularly after the US left the JCPOA – Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – intended to ensure Iran’s nuclear program remains peaceful.
Shifting alliances and the rise of a “Eurasian Core”
Analysts describe Middle East geopolitics as shifting as Russia and China challenge US dominance. They say these powers now form a “Eurasian Core” with Iran, align on strategic interests, and support Tehran to counter US and Israeli influence. The coalition is described as promoting de-dollarisation through BRICS and withstanding market disruptions, while Middle Eastern states wary of US and Israeli actions increasingly turn to China as a counterbalance. The text also says alliances are shifting as US allies, including Turkey, deepen ties with Russia and China.
February 28 escalation and the Strait of Hormuz
The conflict began on February 28, according to the account, when a failed US-Israeli assassination attempt on Iran’s leadership prompted swift Iranian retaliation. Iran’s decentralised administration is described as enabling it to seize and block the Strait of Hormuz, followed by missile and drone attacks. The closure of the Strait triggered a global energy crisis, leading to severe shortages, rationing in some cases, and varying degrees of economic disruption across Asia, Europe, and the US.
Escalation trap theory and prospects of a ground war
University of Chicago Professor Robert Pape’s escalation trap theory is cited as describing how an initial failed US strike triggered Iranian retaliation. The text says US leaders feel compelled to stop Iran’s nuclear efforts, making a ground invasion more likely as a further stage of escalation, while also arguing such an attack is unlikely to succeed and would prolong the conflict, drain US resources, and weaken readiness elsewhere. It adds that the US faces the choice of launching a ground war or accepting a nuclear-armed Iran as a centre of regional power, and that withdrawal could allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons in less than a year.
The text says President Trump has signalled interest in seizing Iran’s resources in a ground operation. It also states that even without hope for victory, the US and Israel may pursue periodic military strikes to limit Iran and maintain regional fragmentation, with leaders committing more resources to justify earlier losses even as domestic support wanes.
Assessments of likely outcomes and wider economic risks
The account says experts agree the US lacks a viable path to full victory, increasing the likelihood of defeat and withdrawal. University of Chicago Professor John Mearsheimer is cited as arguing the US has already lost in Iran because none of the objectives for going to war have been achieved, and that military force alone cannot achieve political aims, with Iran’s nationalism resisting surrender in a way compared to Vietnam and Afghanistan.
The text says Professor Pape sees a high chance the US will launch a ground operation because leaders in similar conflicts escalate under reputational pressure, and that President Trump is likely to act to avoid being seen as the president who allowed Iran to become a nuclear-armed power. It adds that if the US blockades the Strait of Hormuz, Iran and its allies could close key waterways, further disrupting the global economy and intensifying pressure on the US.
What impact do you think further disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz would have on global energy prices?