By Mohamad Hammoud
Three weeks into the conflict, neither the Trump administration nor the “Israeli” government has achieved a single primary objective- an outcome increasingly noted by analysts such as John Mearsheimer. On March 12, 2026, he argued that the United States has “already lost” because it cannot translate overwhelming force into regime change in Tehran. In asymmetrical warfare, he notes, the stronger power loses once it fails to achieve its objectives, while the resistance prevails by enduring.
This pattern of failure is not confined to the US–Iran theater but is also observed on the parallel front with Hezbollah. Retired Colonel Daniel L. Davis echoed a similar assessment on Deep Dive, arguing that the “Israeli” strategy has also failed. The attempt to decapitate Hezbollah’s leadership did not neutralize the organization; instead, it continues to demonstrate the capacity to strike deep inside “Israeli” territory with precision.
The Rising Cost of Failure
The material and human toll of the conflict has already exceeded initial Pentagon projections. Despite accusations that official channels have suppressed data, The Wall Street Journal reported that at least five US refueling tankers were damaged at Saudi Arabia’s Prince Sultan Air Base-an unprecedented event in US military history-while a KC-135 Stratotanker was destroyed in Iraq. Time Magazine confirmed at least 15 American fatalities and nearly 200 wounded, including soldiers killed in a drone strike on a base in Kuwait. On the naval front, Iranian state media, including Tasnim News Agency, reported that the USS Abraham Lincoln and other vessels were struck by IRG drones and forced to retreat.
These battlefield losses have contributed to financial strain. The United States is depleting its reserves of high-end munitions at a rapid pace. The Center for Strategic and International Studies [CSIS] estimates the war has cost $16.5 billion in the first twelve days, with a daily expenditure exceeding $1.43 billion. The Navy has reportedly used most of its regional supply of 319 Tomahawk cruise missiles, affecting force posture in other theaters. Meanwhile, in “Israel,” continuous rocket fire and the mobilization of reserves have impacted economic activity, with analysts forecasting that the resulting GDP contraction could take years to reverse. Together, these figures indicate that the conflict’s costs extend beyond the battlefield, affecting both military readiness and economic stability.
Bases and Borders: The Illusion of Security
The war has forced a hard rethink far beyond the battlefield. Al Jazeera reports that Middle Eastern capitals are quietly reassessing their alliances after watching US bases in Bahrain, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia draw Iranian missile strikes instead of providing cover. That exposure has had consequences: Daily Sabah reports that several Gulf states are now privately debating whether hosting American troops is worth the risk of being pulled into wars that have nothing to do with their own interests.
The picture is no better on the northern front, where fifteen months of preparatory strikes still haven’t secured “Israel’s” border - a failure that has badly damaged the credibility of its intelligence and defense apparatus. Part of the reason is sheer commitment: the Atlantic Council notes that Hezbollah has put roughly 30,000 fighters into what it calls an existential battle, making clear that the earlier decapitation strikes were only a temporary setback. And the resupply hasn’t stopped either - the Institute for the Study of War reports the resistance is replenishing its drone and rocket inventories faster than “Israel” can destroy them, leaving “Israeli” leaders unable to deliver on their promise to return displaced citizens to the north.
Legal Impunity and the Rise of Resistance
Perceptions of Western double standards in ceasefire negotiations have further radicalized regional opinion. Under the United Nations Charter, when a sovereign state such as Lebanon fails to protect its territory from repeated external incursions, the right of resistance becomes a central political argument within the population. For more than a year, “Israel” carried out thousands of violations of Lebanese airspace with little international response, reinforcing the belief that diplomacy is often used to restrain the victim while the aggressor continues military operations.
As the conflict widens, the credibility of the United States as a dominant regional power is increasingly called into question. Damage to American diplomatic facilities and the continued vulnerability of military installations have reinforced the perception that Washington cannot fully protect its own assets. The war has therefore become more than a battlefield struggle; it is a test of geopolitical endurance. If the current trajectory continues without a decisive political outcome, the conflict may mark a long-term shift in the Middle East's balance of power.
No comments:
Post a Comment