Pyrrhic victory against Iran drones

“War is expensive. The Pentagon told Congress that in the first six days of the war in Iran, America spent more than $11 billion. It is estimated that the US gives about $60 billion a year in aid to developing countries, or about $5 billion a month. So, in six days, the war cost about the same amount of money as it gives to the world’s poorest people every two months.

 

The ayatollah and several other Iranian clerics and politicians responsible have been killed, but the war continues and there is no sign that Iran is ready to give up. Instead, it is increasing drone attacks on neighboring countries that it considers US allies and on ships trying to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil passes.

 

Iran’s actions and threats have effectively closed the strait, and oil prices have soared despite record use of strategic reserves. There is little chance of a quick change, as Iran’s new supreme leader the leader said the Strait of Hormuz must remain closed as a “tool of pressure from the enemy.”

 

Americans are highly sensitive to rising fuel prices, growing discontent with government policies and the prospect that Republicans could lose control of the House of Representatives in the fall congressional elections.

 

Trump is under intense pressure to lower fuel prices, and may soon feel the need to declare “victory” and end or at least significantly reduce attacks on Iran.

 

Such a move could try to prevent a new wave of higher inflation that would almost guarantee Republicans a loss in the election. Trump has hinted at least once that he could be impeached again, and he certainly does not want that.

 

US forces have probably already struck key targets in Iran, so new strikes would be relatively less damaging. The Iranian regime understands this, and it will continue to take military action against its neighbors and shipping in its neighborhood, regardless of future U.S. attacks.

 

The wealthier and more vulnerable Persian Arab states pride themselves on being oases of peace and stability in a turbulent region—an image that would suffer greatly if hostilities were to drag on.

 

An idyllic image, once damaged, cannot be easily restored, and they will spare no effort to end the conflict before it has irreparable consequences.

 

For Trump, the best of many not-so-good outcomes is a short-term, probably informal, ceasefire. A much-weakened version of the Iranian regime would remain, at least temporarily, but it would stop attacking the Gulf states and allow oil shipments to resume. What is most important to Trump is that U.S. gas prices return to their previous levels before the summer car travel season begins.

 

This conflict, no less than the events in Ukraine, shows how drones have changed the nature of war, “democratized” it, making it possible for many countries around the world to acquire fairly effective offensive weapons cheaply. In this sense, drones are welcome “world levelers” that increase the military defense potential of smaller or less wealthy countries.

 

The understanding of a potential aggressor that the drones of the attacked country will be able to strike back, even cause considerable material damage, could encourage him to rethink his plans, reduce the passion to attack and punish, and therefore destroy. This in turn would reduce the likelihood of unjustifiable violence, contributing to the protection of innocent civilian lives.

 

In war, many innocent civilians are almost inevitably killed, including a large number of completely innocent children. It is estimated that at the beginning of the Iran-Iraq war, on February 28, a US missile hit the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ primary school in the city of Minab. More than 100 children were killed (and not just by chance), and the total number of those killed exceeded 150.

 

It is well known that not everything in wars is justified, that crimes and violations of the rules of war occur. But when “our people” are responsible for it, there is a clear tendency to keep quiet about the criminality of the event.

 

This is a bad habit, an attempt to at least partially hide or disguise some of the horrors of war, its potential criminality, in order to create the impression that it is almost as harmless as a computer war game. Such disinfection of the cruel reality of war makes it easier to accept and justify it, so this tendency must be resisted.

 

Drones are relatively cheap. Most of them cost from 35 thousand to 50 thousand US dollars, and a Tomahawk cruise missile from 1.5 million to 2.0 million, so about 40 times cheaper. They are also much easier to launch and direct at a target.

 

These “world levelers” do not have a clear-cut effect. Their cheapness and therefore availability not only allow the weak to better defend themselves against the attacks of a stronger enemy. They can encourage small states, paramilitary groups, even terrorist gangs to attack their enemies or terrorize civilians.

 

I have no doubt that in the coming years, paramilitary groups in Africa will arm themselves with drones and expand the boundaries of their activities. As always, the most affected will be the local population, but unlike similar phenomena in Eastern Europe or the Middle East, they will not attract international attention or serious efforts to curb the violence.

 

The tendency to spread conflicts horizontally is probably as old as wars. The difference is that drones provide excellent and cheap conditions for such a spread of conflict.

 

All the Persian Gulf countries have already become potential targets for Iran, and various circumstances will determine which will suffer the most. Horizontal spread of war means that the war is expanding into new geographical areas, countries, or fronts, although it does not necessarily increase the force used. Iran probably no longer has any special weapons, but will direct its conventional weapons against more countries, hoping that they will increase the pressure on Washington to de-escalate.

 

In each case, it is already clear that this time, as in previous cases, the US efforts to knock the enemy down with powerful strikes have not produced the expected results. Battles won, but not the war.

 

Nations may not be immortal, but they are certainly resilient. As long as the attacks continue, it cannot be categorically stated that the US will not achieve clear success this time too. But the probability is very high. Even the genocide committed by Israel in the Gaza Strip has not forced many Palestinians to give up their efforts to create their own state.”