The United States and Israel’s attacks on Iran have now embroiled the entire Middle East in a war characterized by the use of large quantities of missiles and drones.
Like Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, the United States and Israel are using naked force to push ahead with their own political agendas. The law-of-the-jungle aphorism of ‘might makes right’ seems to be sweeping across the world. Does this mean that the world has entered an era in which military power alone holds sway?
I don’t think so. When observing the two wars, doubts arise about whether military power is actually helping to achieve the goals. Both wars were launched to attain political objectives in a short period of time, but things are not going as desired by those countries.
The US and Israel seem to have established air superiority over Iran just a few days into their offensive. Nonetheless, Iran has not surrendered and is instead continuously staging counterattacks on other Middle Eastern countries that host US military bases.
Moreover, Iran has declared a closure of the Strait of Hormuz, taking bold steps to choke off supplies from the Gulf area to the rest of the world, and the United States has been unable to take any effective countermeasures against this.
In other words, these two wars show that no matter how overwhelming the difference in military power between the two sides is, it is not so easy to force an opposing country that resolutely resists to accept political demands in a short period of time, let alone force it to ‘unconditionally surrender.’
There are several factors that make it difficult to accomplish political objectives through destructive physical force or threats.
The first factor is the opposing country’s firm resolve not to yield. Ukraine, for instance, has maintained its resolute stance not to capitulate to Russia’s unjustifiable demands, in spite of the US’ calls for a ceasefire. In Iran, the Israeli intelligence agency apparently expected to see moves to topple its leadership from within emerge right after the beginning of the US-Israeli attacks, but no such thing has happened, even after the killing of many leaders.
Second, international norms regarding military action during conflicts are still in effect to a certain degree, although they have been weakened. Nevertheless, no countries have publicly declared their intention to kill civilians in large numbers, and situations like the indiscriminate air raids in World War II have been avoided so far.
Third, the asymmetry of the weapons and tactics used in modern warfare is also significant. Even if a country cannot defeat an attacker using the same types of weapons or tactics, it may still be able to counter them by employing different types of weapons or tactics. If Iran says it will lay inexpensive mines to block the Strait of Hormuz, ship operators will inevitably hesitate to travel through the waterway even if there are not a large number of mines.
Fourth, global economic interdependence reduces the use of destructive force and mitigates the impact of intimidation. The interdependence of the global economy is complex. Even if there are no deep economic ties with a hostile nation, a country that takes military action will face various economic repercussions.
The US itself is hardly dependent on Middle Eastern crude oil, but Iran’s counterattacks on other Gulf nations and the Islamic Republic’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz have sent Middle Eastern crude oil prices soaring.
A spike in energy prices leads to spiraling prices for other products and supply constraints. Stock markets react to concerns about these situations, fluctuating wildly as people get excited or discouraged regarding the course of the war. If the closure of the Strait of Hormuz is prolonged, the situation could bring about a crisis far more serious for the global economy than the oil crises of the 1970s.
The outbreak of the war in Ukraine and that in the Middle East has worsened the circumstances of all the countries involved. In short, military power doesn’t help achieve political objectives.
Needless to say, it isn’t easy to end a war once it starts, since nations, too, don’t always act rationally. However, the continuation of the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East will bring nothing but harm to not only the countries directly involved but also the entire world.
The most rational choice in both wars is first and foremost to achieve a ceasefire. It is crucial to persuade the countries directly involved of this. The Japan News/Asia News Network
Akihiko Tanaka is president of the Japan International Cooperation Agency, a post he took up in April 2022 for the second time after his first stint from 2012 to 2015. He also served as vice president of the University of Tokyo from 2009 to 2012. He was president of the Tokyo-based National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies from 2017 to March 2022.
The Philippine Daily Inquirer is a member of the Asia News Network, an alliance of 22 media titles in the region.