The United States and Israel have failed to win the sympathy of global public opinion, and their aggressive actions have been condemned by traditional adversaries such as China and Russia, while receiving little cooperation from NATO allies, Japan, and South Korea. They have also so far failed to undermine the existing regime in Tehran, despite successfully assassinating some of its top leaders, including the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

This is almost the first time in the history of U.S. foreign military interventions that Washington appears to be alone on the battlefield, despite repeated requests to allies for assistance. This uncomfortable situation has clear reasons, the most prominent of which may be the Trump administration’s disregard for its “Atlantic” allies and the lack of coordination with them before launching the war on Iran. These allies have the right to be fully informed of the details and objectives of the war, and their role cannot be limited to protecting oil and gas tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, which was closed due to Iranian threats.

It is possible to accept the validity of some analyses that argue Iran did not help prevent the outbreak of war. The harsh and threatening language used by the late Supreme Leader and his team was not appropriate given the sensitivity of the situation, meaning it lacked “brinkmanship diplomacy” or failed to account for the seriousness of the moment. Tehran could have offered certain concessions that might have averted the catastrophe. However, Iran does not bear responsibility for the start of this war. Violations of international law, launching a war without legitimacy, or one that lacked international consensus, are the responsibility of the U.S. administration and Israel. The severity of Iran’s negotiating stance does not justify initiating such a war in the first place. Many of Washington’s allies adopt this view, and its adversaries express it as well. Washington ignored the United Nations Security Council and most of the world’s influential powers, even though it could have pursued legal and diplomatic measures to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions, prevent it from advancing its ballistic missile development, and limit its ability to supply its allies or “proxies” with money and weapons.

It is certain that Washington and Tel Aviv have undisclosed strategic objectives they aim to achieve through this brutal war. Chief among them is likely the establishment of absolute dominance over the Arab region, given its strategic geographic location and energy resources. Such unilateral control would threaten the security of Southern Europe, contain China’s Belt and Road initiative, and advance declared religious ambitions, even if these ambitions are based on fragile mythological assumptions.

Both those who launched the war and those targeted by it have become prisoners of the slogans they adopted before the start of military operations.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the writers are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Annahar