FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
This strategy aims to expand the geographical scope of the conflict through attacks on the Gulf states and increase the economic cost to the US and the global economy, especially in the energy sector.
At the current stage, the war between the US and Israel on the one hand and Iran and its allies on the other is turning into a test of two different approaches to military escalation. According to analysts, each of them could turn into a strategic trap.
Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu have yet to achieve their strategic goals, which observers say remain unclear and evolving. Although the initial campaign of strikes eliminated key Iranian leaders, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, the regime in Tehran continues to function, while Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium remains uncertain. At the same time, airstrikes are intensifying and hitting more and more targets.
In response, Iran has chosen a long-prepared strategy of so-called “horizontal escalation.” This strategy aims to expand the geographical scope of the conflict through attacks on Gulf states and increase the economic cost to the US and the global economy, especially in the energy sector.
The coming days and weeks are expected to show more clearly the effects of this dynamic, including the limits of American military power in an increasingly multipolar and fragile world.
American historian Robert Pape, who has studied the use of airpower and advised several US administrations, warns of the danger of an “escalation trap.” According to him, this occurs when an attacker gradually becomes involved in a conflict that is more complex, longer and more costly than initially anticipated.
Pape emphasizes that the initial attack was almost entirely successful at the tactical level. However, according to him, the problem arises when tactical successes do not translate into strategic achievements, that is, the fulfillment of political and national security objectives.
"If military dominance does not bring strategic results, then the attacker tends to increase the intensity of actions, entering a new phase of escalation," Pape said. He estimates that the conflict is currently in its second phase and could be approaching an even more dangerous phase.
According to him, the Trump administration was influenced by the success of the initial attack and created an “illusion of control,” based on the accuracy of the weapons used. This situation, he and other critics argue, pushed Iran to activate its own strategy of escalation, which could have broader economic and political consequences at the global level.
By striking targets in the Gulf states and threatening shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, Tehran aims to increase the costs of war for Washington beyond the dimension of direct military confrontation.
Pape says these actions are also aimed at creating political tensions between the US and the Gulf countries, as well as putting pressure on the region's governments from their public opinions.
Meanwhile, Israel has signaled the possibility of another escalation. Defense Minister Israel Katz said the Israeli military has been ordered to prepare for expanded operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah, the Iran-backed group, and warned of the possibility of taking territory if the rocket attacks continue.
Robert Malley, former US envoy to Iran and negotiator in nuclear talks with Tehran, believes that the further development of the conflict may be influenced more by political decisions than by a clear long-term strategy.
He warns that escalation could take various forms, including sending troops to the ground, controlling parts of Iranian territory, or collaborating with ethnic groups in the region.
Analyst Jack Watling from the Royal United Services Institute emphasizes that the dynamics of the conflict are influenced by multiple debates: within American security policy, between the US and Israel, as well as between political and military structures in Iran, including the Revolutionary Guard.
According to him, part of the US strategic community is focused on the risk of a potential conflict with China and seeks to avoid involvement in several major crises simultaneously.
Meanwhile, for Iran, actions in the Persian Gulf are aimed not only at retaliation but also at restoring deterrence in the region. Watling warns that even if the intensity of missile and drone attacks declines, Tehran could continue to exert pressure through long-term threats to shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.
On the other hand, American analyst Robert D. Kaplan highlights another risk: the gradual escalation of the conflict. In an analysis for the magazine Foreign Affairs, he warns that an internal destabilization in Iran could push the US to intervene more deeply in the conflict.
Kaplan compares this possibility to the evolution of the Vietnam War, which gradually escalated over several years./ Adapted from The Guardian
Kur ka jetuar Bota ndonjehere pa luftra!? Luftrat jane motorri i levizjes se planetit. Por me e mira eshte larg bythes time sic tha i madhi Nastradin Hoxha.