Trump claims to have completely destroyed Iran's military forces.

United States President Trump declared on 5 that the United States had “completely destroyed” Iranian military forces and would soon “leave” from Iran's war, while Iran “has no choice but to reach agreement with the United States”.

As soon as Trump's voice was dropped, it was once again “shocked in the face”. In response to an air strike by United States forces in parts of Iran in the early hours of the same day, as reported by the Iranian media on 6 June, Iraq launched a missile attack on the United States air force base in Kuwait and the United States military fifth fleet facility in Bahrain.

United States President Trump.

At this time, neither the full resumption of hostilities nor agreement was reached. What is the situation of the two countries and of the Gulf States affected by the spillovers of the war, and how will they cope with the change, in the stalemate between the United States and Iraq and between them?

Iran: demonstrating resilience under high pressure

Operation “Standing down”, high-intensity air strikes, “economic anger” pressure... Since the end of February, Iran has suffered significant losses under United States and Israeli military strikes and maximum pressure.

At the beginning of the war, Ali Khamenei, then the supreme leader of Iran, was killed and several senior Iranian leaders were killed in successive attacks. As a result of US-Israeli strikes, Iran's infrastructure has been damaged, its conventional forces have been severely weakened, with a large number of casualties, and Iranian “arguments of resistance” allies, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, have been severely damaged.

However, as the fighting progressed, Iran demonstrated its resistance and strategic resilience and gradually took some initiative in the game with the United States.

At the political level, Mujtaba Khamenei took over as the supreme leader of Iran and the Iranian regime achieved a smooth transition. In response to recent rumours about the marginalization of the Iranian Government and the resignation of the President, Iranian high-level officials immediately denied and stabilized the hearts and minds of the people of the country. According to analysts, the cohesion of the core of the Iranian regime was not broken by the fighting, but rather consolidated under high external pressure.

At the economic and social level, subject to the United States maritime embargo and sanctions, Iran ' s imports and exports have been affected, some supplies are in short supply and inflation is evident. However, Iran has been subjected to severe United States sanctions for many years, with some coping experience and resilience. The once volatile social order that preceded the outbreak of the war was also gradually restored, and the population showed unprecedented unity as a result of foreign enemy aggression.

At the military level, Iran relies on asymmetric warfare, with its geographical advantage to control navigation in the Straits of Hormuz, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the continued attacks on United States military bases in the Middle East using a variety of missiles and low-cost drones, on the other, leading to the escalation of global oil prices, the obstruction of international shipping and the constant consumption of critical munitions by the United States military and regional States, on the other, forcing the United States to accept ceasefire negotiations.

At the regional level of influence, Iran seeks to control the Strait of Hormuz with Oman. In its negotiations with the United States, Iran insisted on a simultaneous ceasefire in the direction of Lebanon and, when the security interests of Hezbollah were compromised, showed the United States the bottom card of Yemeni Al-Houthi or would block the Mande Strait. According to the analysis, Iran continues to have influence and convening power over its regional allies and has the capacity to influence and transform the fighting.

Holmuz Channel

Gulf States: towards security pluralism

During this war, several Gulf States were attacked because of their United States military bases, their exports and imports were restricted because of obstructions in the Straits of Hormuz, and their security and development were under double pressure.

According to an article by the Middle East Commission of Qatar Research Institute on Global Issues, the United States performance in the war is forcing the Gulf States to accelerate their defence “no risk” and reduce their dependence on the United States alone. According to scholars such as Marcus Schneider, an expert from the Friedrich Ebert Foundation of Germany, Gulf States in geopolitical turmoil are each promoting flexible and pragmatic relations of diversity.

Saudi Arabia seeks to establish cooperative relationships with other countries that complement resources and capacities. Between March and April, the Foreign Ministers of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan met three times to ease the situation in the Middle East and to address regional challenges. According to the British Guardian, this is intended to shape a new geo-structure to counterbalance Israel and Iran. However, the success of such a mechanism remains to be seen, subject to realistic factors.

Saudi Arabia and Pakistan signed a common strategic defence agreement last September. It has recently indicated that Qatar and Turkey will either join the agreement. It has been analysed that, if the expansion is successful, the four countries will be complementary in terms of military capabilities, military systems and funding.

At the same time, the Kingdom does not exclude the continuation of détente with Iran. The British Financial Times disclosed in mid-May that Saudi Arabia was exploring with Iran the possibility of a non-aggression treaty. The analysts believe that, once the fighting has subsided, this mechanism is expected to create a security buffer zone for Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States and to guarantee their economic development.

The United Arab Emirates, as the most heavily attacked Gulf State by Iran, had decided to strengthen its ties with the United States and deepen its cooperation with India. The “I2U2” cooperation mechanisms already in place in the four countries are reported to extend from trade and trade and technology to the area of security. The United Arab Emirates and India agreed in May on a framework for a strategic defence partnership between the two countries. Israel, for its part, has deployed anti-aircraft systems such as the Iron Dome in the United Arab Emirates to help it intercept Iranian missiles.

The Director of the Economic and Technical Research Institute of the Chinese Petroleum Group, Ruequan, said that the war had highlighted the weakness of traditional regional mechanisms, such as the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC), in their response to the crisis and that some Gulf States had instead sought to establish new security mechanisms to address risks. While these new mechanisms do, theoretically and conceptually, help countries to complement each other ' s strengths, their practical effectiveness remains to be seen.

United States: “Long-term strategic failure”

During this war, high-intensity air strikes by the United States failed to overthrow the Iranian regime, to completely destroy Iraq ' s combat capabilities and to force Iran to compromise on the nuclear issue. Rather, it was Iran that, by asymmetric means, dragged the war into a war of consumption “on the Iranian side of time”. According to the American Center for Progress, the US has failed to achieve any of its war goals, instead of being caught in a “totally self-inflicted quagmire” and launching an Iranian war is a “strategic error.”

Trump and Netanyahu.

The analysis suggests that Trump, who had hoped to achieve a “quick win” through limited military strikes, was “set up” by the fighting, exposing the United States military battle short set and strategic miscalculations.

As Robert Cagan, a fellow of the Brookings Institution in the United States, wrote, a few short weeks of fighting against Iraq had brought the United States military arsenal to a dangerous low and could not be filled in the short term, and the countries of the world would reassess their combined strength. According to an editorial in the United States newspaper Las Vegas Sun, the Trump administration failed to prepare for a protracted conflict with Iran, underestimating both the probability of a quick and long-lasting war and the spillover effect of the war on the global energy market and exposing its strategic short-sightedness.

Public opinion is generally of the view that the situation of the United States in the Middle East “is getting worse” than before the outbreak of the war.

On the one hand, through this campaign, Iran ' s base has become stronger and less likely to compromise easily. According to the United States Times weekly article, the final outcome of the negotiations between the Trump Government and the Iraqi side was nothing more than the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, which had been open before the war, and a nuclear agreement that would not be more elaborate than the Iranian nuclear agreement of 2015.

On the other hand, the Gulf States, which were heavily dependent on the United States, suffered a heavy toll from this war provoked by the United States. The sense of ownership of these countries has increased and the United States is no longer the only one to look forward to. According to Kagan, the United States “failed” in the Iranian war, and the first of those “sacrifices” would be the American predominance in the Gulf region.

Almost a hundred days after the war in Iran, “failure” has become a growing consensus in American public opinion about the war. Aaron David Miller, Senior Researcher at the Carnegie Institute for International Peace, United States, said: “The war that the Trump Government had expected to win in the short term is evolving into a long-term strategic failure.” The article in the United States Foreign Policy magazine states categorically that the Iranian war or the Trump government was “the biggest failure”.

Source: Chen Xian, Yanyan, Ma Xinhua