Version imprimableApril 24, 2026
The illegal and unconscionable war waged by the US and Israel against the people and state of Iran will not only be remembered for its moral depravity but also for the colossal strategic blunder it has become. Unlike Israel which has long wanted to permanently cripple Iran politically, militarily and territorially, for the US the war never had a clear set of reasons. It began in the wake of another immoral and illegal act: the kidnapping of Nicolas Maduro, then the sitting President of Venezuela, and his wife. This “success” perhaps led Donald Trump to believe that a military operation in Iran would lead to a swift victory.
It initially began with bold proclamations (on the social media platform Truth Social) calling for regime change and the complete capitulation of the Iranian state, but quickly devolved, within days, into contradictory claims: that the aim of the war was to open the Strait of Hormuz—which had in fact been open before the war—or that the United States did not care whether it remained open, culminating in thinly veiled threats of the use of nuclear weapons.
First, it is important to address a common idea now circulating within progressive left
circles that Israel has dragged the United States into the war, thereby highlighting the
importance of the Israel lobby in the US. It is undeniable that the Israel lobby is incredibly powerful, perhaps more powerful than any other lobby, given its pervasive influence in US society. A prime example is the way the lobby was able to prevail upon the US state to suppress dissent, especially on university campuses, where concerns were being voiced over the genocide in Gaza.
However powerful the Israel lobby may be, it does not by itself prove that Israel controls US foreign policy, as some seem to believe. In fact, it is the United States that has, for about sixty years, funded and armed Israel to serve as its watchdog in West Asia. Benjamin Netanyahu has, by his own admission, sought a war with Iran for about forty years. He has repeatedly attempted to lead the United States into war with Iran and has succeeded only with Donald Trump—primarily because the Israeli military is incapable of mounting any significant offensive without active US intervention.
Never have the Israelis seemed more dependent on the United States—militarily, for
equipment such as interceptors and the vast sums of money they receive, and politically and diplomatically, as they must be continuously defended in the UN and other international arenas while state leaders, belatedly, are forced to express concern over the perpetration of genocide in response to negative public opinion. More recently, after Israel struck Qatar during ongoing negotiations with Hamas in a bid to assassinate its leadership, killing several people, the White House forced Netanyahu to read a US-scripted apology to the Qatari Prime Minister, an episode captured in a widely circulated photograph.
In the days and months after October 7, 2023, as Israel launched a genocidal campaign against the inhabitants of Gaza, the United States chose to become an active partner in this
indefensible act. In the initial days, it seemed puzzling why the Biden administration would not rein in the Israeli state, especially as the tide of public opinion against Israel appeared to be hurting the Democrats’ electoral prospects and had effectively ruled out Biden from running for office again. However, as events unfolded, the situation crystallised into a geostrategic strengthening of the United States and Israel in West Asia, however immoral the actions and high the human costs for those at the receiving end.
Hamas, as a military threat, was greatly weakened. The threat, however, can never be fully eliminated, as there is no military solution to a political problem. A brutal occupation of Palestine will always and inevitably elicit resistance, which the Israelis will perceive as a security threat. The strength of Hezbollah in Lebanon appeared to be severely curtailed after several of its key leaders were assassinated, including the charismatic Hassan Nasrallah, who was the ideological face of the organisation. Shortly thereafter, the Syrian regime under Bashar al-Assad fell, dealing a significant blow to Iran and improving the regional balance in favour of Israel. Thus, whether support for Israel was planned with all these outcomes in mind, the unfolding of events reconfigured the geopolitical alignment in a way that decisively favoured the United States.
The current war on Iran has significantly undone much of the above. The Iranian leadership, now largely killed in decapitation strikes by the United States and Israel, had on multiple occasions sought to avoid direct confrontation with the United States and had favoured a diplomatic resolution. Now their hand has been forced, and relatively more hardliners oversee the direction of Iranian policy.
Iran has demonstrated the incredible leverage it possesses over the global economy through its ability to control the Strait of Hormuz. It has also clearly demonstrated the military vulnerability of the Gulf states and US bases within them, as Iranian missiles and drones cantarget these with relative ease. Unlike the man-made canals of Suez and Panama, the Straits of Hormuz is an international waterway. Iran’s claim to sovereignty over it and threat to begin charging tolls on ships passing through the strait is illegal and more of a bargaining counter to press for reparations and release of its externally frozen bank assets and above all for substantial lifting of US sanctions which have resulted in long standing economic suffering. Contrary to earlier assumptions, Hezbollah remains less weakened than its adversaries would have liked to believe.
The Gulf states have proven to be especially susceptible to Iranian attacks The targeting of cities such as Abu Dhabi and Dubai strikes at the heart of the economic model on which the Gulf states are structured.
Israel seeks war not only in Iran but also in Lebanon. These goals are quite distinct from those of the United States. The United States would prefer a stable configuration in West Asia in which states—often undemocratic—are pliant and subservient, and in which cooperation with Israel ensures its dominance and control over access to some of the largest oil reserves in the world. Instability and failed states tend to produce organisations such as ISIS, which may pose a problem for the United States in the future.
Israel seeks failed states and fractured borders throughout West Asia. This would enable it to secure additional territory contiguous to Israel and permanently reshape the map of West Asia, which is one of its stated aims. Failed states would imply that its dominance in the region would be complete and unchallenged, enabling it to carry out periodic acts of mass violence against other countries as and when it chooses.
India has had civilizational ties with Iran, and after the 1979 revolution maintained
relatively close diplomatic relations, which in recent weeks have shown signs of strain. After Israel had carried out a genocide for more than two years, the Indian Prime Minister visited Israel in February 2026 and barely mentioned Palestine. In recent negotiations between Iran and the United States, Pakistan has played a dominant diplomatic role, serving as a go- between, and Islamabad has been the venue of choice for these talks. Thus, India finds itself sandwiched between China, a growing superpower and Pakistan, which has positioned itself close to both the United States and Iran—countries that will remain dominant players in the politics of West Asia.
It bears repeating that the foregoing analysis primarily focuses on the geopolitical
dimensions and possible rationales of state actors. Marxists who believe that the fate of working people depend on the democratic decision-making and actions of workers themselves, have little faith in states and their rules, whether in the Global South or the North.
Any US attack on a sovereign country is a violation of international law, and the blatant threat of the use of nuclear force is an abomination. However, this may also have breathed new life into the IRGC, which had been quite unpopular among the Iranian people. We unequivocally oppose and condemn the US-Israel war on Iran and call for an enduring peace with lifting of punitive sanctions while standing in solidarity with the struggling people of Iran and assert that only they have the right to determine their own government and destiny.
