AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): The war between Iran and the United States is not merely a military confrontation between two countries; it could have far-reaching consequences for the security and political landscape of the Middle East, the future of U.S. military presence in the region, and Tehran's relations with Arab Gulf countries. As the continuation of the conflict seriously questions the region's previous security equations, the status of U.S. military bases, the extent of regional countries' reliance on Washington's support, and the future of existing alliances have come into sharper focus than ever.
Simultaneously, economic pressures and sanctions have once again become one of America's main tools for exerting pressure on Iran; a tool that, alongside field developments in the war, could affect the region's economy and even international economic relations. On the other hand, recent developments have raised the question of whether the balance of power in the region is changing, and whether Gulf countries are moving toward more independent security arrangements and different relations with Iran.
In such circumstances, examining the consequences of the war on U.S. influence in the region, the future of this country's military bases, Iran-Gulf relations, the status of regional alliances, and the effectiveness of economic sanctions provides a clearer picture of the equations that may take shape after the end of this conflict.
In this regard, Talal Atrisi, a professor at the Lebanese University and Director General of the Beirut Center for Strategic Studies, in an interview with ABNA, elaborated on the various dimensions of the war file between Iran and the United States and Donald Trump's claim about imposing the toughest economic pressure on Iran.
Transfer of U.S. Equipment; A Sign of Washington's Confusion Against Iran
This professor of strategic studies stated, "The transfer of U.S. forces, military equipment, radars, and other vital systems from some Gulf countries to Jordan indicates confusion and bewilderment in assessing the nature of the conflict with the Islamic Republic. This assessment confusion has become a topic of discussion among many American experts, who speak of a lack of clear objectives, failure to achieve results, and the absence of a specific or multi-stage plan."
Atrisi added, "The transfer of forces to Jordan came after the United States was surprised by Iran's strong response to bases in Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, and other locations."
He said, "The United States believed that transferring these military assets to Jordan might go unnoticed by Iran or that Iran would not attack these bases in Jordan, but the opposite happened. This shows that the experience of these forces and the killing of American soldiers has negatively affected the U.S. President and also disrupted and obscured American plans in this regard."
It is now unclear what America's plan is regarding the continued presence of its forces in the Gulf countries or Jordan. Will they withdraw completely? Will these bases be rebuilt? This will take a long time.
U.S. Bases and the Beginning of Changing Security Equations in the Persian Gulf
The Lebanese University professor emphasized, "Therefore, it must be said that this action indicates a retreat, withdrawal, and a clear lack of planning regarding the nature of Iran's response, as well as a miscalculation about it. Of course, this action strengthens Iran's position, which took the initiative in attacking the bases in Jordan, and also relatively weakens America's position in the balance of power between the two sides, namely the United States and Iran."
He continued, "Without a doubt, reports about U.S. bases in the Middle East in general, and especially in the Gulf countries, have entered a new phase and, frankly, an inevitable situation."
Atrisi said, "These bases, which were originally established to protect the Gulf countries, have been ineffective in achieving their goal; rather, they have defended themselves and Israel. In other words, missiles were fired to intercept Iranian missiles targeting Israel. I believe this phase has ended. The United States is acknowledging the fact that rebuilding these bases will require significant time and billions of dollars in funding. The Gulf countries themselves have also explicitly spoken of the lack of need to extend the permit for U.S. bases."
He stated, "The tripartite Mecca statement also conveys the message that these countries will rely on defending themselves against any aggression. It is as if they have moved past the issue of American protection of the region and reached the principle of relying on self-protection."
This Lebanese University professor said, "This will also open the way for discussion and dialogue between these countries and Iran, and perhaps this dialogue has already begun; because Iran has proven itself as a regional power capable of standing against the United States and neutralizing America's war objectives, and has now become a power with which understanding and cooperation within the framework of security treaties and non-aggression on shared interests is possible. I believe this discussion has become more serious today."
The End of Anti-Iran Alliances and the Decline of U.S. Influence
He emphasized, "The era of Gulf-U.S. alliances against Iran, or Gulf-Israel alliances against Iran, has ended. It seems the next phase will witness cooperation between Iran and the Gulf countries, and the United States will be the least influential actor in the region."
Atrisi continued, "The U.S. allies have become frustrated due to America's failure to achieve its objectives against Iran. This situation is due to the contradiction and shifting goals of the U.S. President. One moment he wants to overthrow the regime, and the next he seeks to reopen the Strait of Hormuz; one moment he speaks of destroying missiles, and the next he wants to dismantle the nuclear program."
He added, "These countries do not know what the United States wants. These allies have become vulnerable to Iran's missile attacks on U.S. military bases without any support from America. America's allies outside the region, including some European countries, Japan, and South Korea, are also not providing help. They do not want to participate in the forced reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and they do not want to be involved in a war they had no role in starting. Therefore, if we examine the overall trajectory of the United States since the start of the war against Iran a few months ago, the general trend shows a decline in U.S. influence and a decrease in allies' trust in the United States."
This Lebanese University professor emphasized, "In fact, these countries, which refused to engage in the war from the beginning, are now trying to escape U.S. pressure. Today, the United States is almost without allies or without key allies, except for its Israeli ally, which is also facing international isolation. All of this indicates a scenario that was not anticipated before the war with Iran."
He continued, "It will certainly be difficult for the United States to accept the decline and erosion of its political influence and to admit the end of its military presence in the region; rather, it will try with all its might, along with the Zionist regime and any country in the region that can exert pressure, to prevent the realization of Iran's new influence in the region. The United States cannot easily accept that Iran has the upper hand in the Strait of Hormuz or that it has become a regional power with which regional countries seek cooperation and understanding."
Iran's Resistance and the Effort to Transform Military Achievement into Political Victory
Atrisi said, "This is not a simple matter. It means acknowledging the beginning of the countdown to the end of American influence and hegemony, an influence that has been severely damaged in this war. Iran has counted on the passage of time to turn this resilience into a political victory. This country believes that time is not in favor of Trump nor in favor of the United States. At the same time, Iran is trying to open communication channels with regional countries and prepare the ground for establishing joint arrangements with them."
He stated, "From this perspective, this is a political victory. Furthermore, Iran now sees the axis of resistance as an inseparable part of its national security, provided it can protect this axis. So Iran will undoubtedly achieve a political victory. This is an unexpected development and will force the United States to explore every way to prevent this resistance from turning into a political victory."
Sanctions; Washington's Last Tool to Contain Iran
Regarding Trump's claim to impose severe economic pressure on Iran, the Lebanese University professor emphasized, "Sanctions against Iran are not a new issue. Iran has lived under sanctions since the revolution. I remember that Obama, the former U.S. President, also imposed a package of sanctions on Iran, and at the time, he stated that these sanctions were among the toughest imaginable. Despite this, Iran was able to withstand these sanctions, which are not insignificant and harm the people, and negatively affect imports, trade, oil sales, and similar activities. But what does this mean in the current confrontation between the United States and Iran?"
He continued, "Returning to sanctions and economic blockade means the failure of military action and the inability to resume hostilities to attack Iran, subdue it, or force it to surrender according to Trump's wishes. Also, sanctions, regardless of their severity, require a long time to affect economic, commercial, and other aspects of life."
Atrisi said, "Iran, as is well known, has gained experience in dealing with sanctions and finding ways to circumvent them. In addition, other countries of the world will also be negatively affected by refraining from dealing with Iran. This means that these countries will not fully comply with such sanctions either. Therefore, sanctions have negative effects on all parties. If we add to these the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab al-Mandab Strait, the global economy will certainly feel concerned and be negatively affected. It will not only be Iran that is affected by the sanctions, as Trump wants; the scope of these effects will expand."
He concluded by adding, "As long as Iran has the capacity to withstand pressure and can force the entire world to pay the price by closing the Strait of Hormuz and reducing exports of oil, fertilizer, gas, and other products, economic sanctions, despite their costs, will not achieve what Trump wants, namely forcing Iran to accept his demands. Iran is now very close to achieving a political victory and changing regional equations by creating new alliances in the region. The United States is trying to prevent this through economic sanctions, but I believe that matters are no longer entirely in the hands of the United States."
**************
End/ 345E
