AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): Foreign Policy magazine, in a report examining the consequences of America's war against Iran, described the conflict as a "war of choice" which, according to the magazine, ended in widespread political and military defeat for Washington, the effects of which will remain for years to come both domestically and internationally.
The report states that the war against Iran, from a strategic perspective, constitutes an even deeper defeat for the United States than the Vietnam War, because it has not only damaged Washington's vital interests but has also weakened the country's global position. Foreign Policy emphasizes that the Vietnam War, despite its heavy costs, did not prevent America from continuing its role during the Cold War, but the consequences of the war with Iran have been different.
The Revelation of America's Limitations in Prolonged Wars
Referring to the differences between the Iran war and America's previous military defeats, the report writes that in this conflict, unlike Vietnam, there was no large-scale military mobilization or widespread domestic protests. However, the criterion for assessing America's defeat is not the number of human casualties, but rather the extent of damage inflicted on the country's strategic objectives and interests.
Foreign Policy believes that the Vietnam War, despite its massive casualties, did not change the trajectory of American power in the international system, but in the war with Iran, Washington withdrew from the field in a weaker condition than when the conflict began. According to the magazine, America's military performance, despite possessing advanced equipment, revealed the country's limitations for entering and sustaining prolonged wars. Also, the targeting of Iranian civilians, especially children in Minab, became one of the symbols of this war.
The Continuation of Iran's Missile and Cyber Power
Another part of the report states that Iran's success in penetrating some American defense systems has raised serious questions about Washington's ability to counter prolonged and attritional attacks.
Foreign Policy also considers America's failure to achieve the objective of regime change in Iran as one of its most significant failures. According to the magazine, the war not only did not lead to the realization of this goal but also strengthened the cohesion and position of the ruling system in Iran.
The report also refers to the joint U.S.-Israeli attacks, writing that these operations once again exposed the limitations of classical military power. Despite extensive attacks, Iran's missile program remained intact, and according to the author, this indicated that any new military action against Iran would face serious challenges.
Declining Confidence in American Power
Foreign Policy further, referring to the geopolitical importance of the Strait of Hormuz, emphasizes that Iran has become more aware than ever of the capacity of this strategic passage as an effective economic lever in global equations.
The report concludes by stating that America's withdrawal from the Middle East, like the Vietnam experience, will be a difficult and costly option. In the author's view, the United States is now in one of its weakest domestic and international positions, the confidence of its allies in its deterrence capability and power has diminished, and the American public will also view new military interventions beyond its borders with greater skepticism.
**************
End/ 345E
