AA Edit | Was MoU on Iran Set To Fail?

War without a strategic purpose and appreciation of ground realities is reckless. Similarly, peace without a serious framework is fragile. The latest attack between the United States and Iran shows the danger of both.

The United States and Israel appear to have underestimated the resilience of the Iranian regime before starting the hostilities in West Asia. While Israel had a clear endgame, the US did not appear prepared for escalation or putting boots on ground.

Though the United States is a preeminent power in the world, the Iran forces showed their courage and made great use of its strategic asset — the Strait of Hormuz. A properly thought-out military action could have envisaged all scenarios before pushed West Asia into an undesired war.

A temporary ceasefire, especially one reached under pressure and without institutional safeguards, can be worse than no agreement because it creates an illusion of calm while the ground beneath remains unstable.

The Strait of Hormuz is not an ordinary flashpoint. It is one of the most important energy routes in the world. Any disruption there immediately raises fears across global markets. Therefore, any agreement concerning Iran, the United States and the Gulf must be built on a durable security arrangement.

President Donald Trump’s see-saw approach is particularly frustrating for the global community. One day, there is talk of talks. Another day, the deal is declared virtually over. Such inconsistency may serve short-term political messaging, but it does not reflect serious appreciation of ground realities.

Iran, too, cannot escape responsibility. Using regional instability or the Strait of Hormuz as leverage only deepens mistrust and invites harsher responses. But the larger lesson is that great powers must act with greater discipline.

Without these, war is naught but avoidable adventurism and peace becomes a temporary pause before the next explosion. The world needs neither. It needs responsible statecraft.