Iran bore witness to massive strikes from the forces of the U.S. and Israel combined on Feb. 28. U.S. and Israeli forces targeted nuclear assets, military bases and other key infrastructure in Iran.
Iran retaliated with a counterstrike, sending missiles and drones at key U.S. allies across the Middle East. Pete Hegseth, Trump’s Secretary of War (formally Secretary of Defense), said four U.S. soldiers were killed during the retaliatory strikes.
With the start of the conflict, and further closing of the Strait of Hormuz, international flights were landed, prices increased and the potential fear of war with increasing international implications gripped the world.
The Strait of Hormuz
“Iran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz,” Nicholas Spina, an associate professor of political science at Slippery Rock University, said. “I think it’s absolutely trying to inflict pain on the world in hopes the world puts pressure on the U.S. and Israel to stop”
Spina described the Strait of Hormuz as a “choke point” and stressed just how crucial the strait is to the world’s economy.
“It’s a very small, little section of the world that 20% of our oil, 20% of energy and a substantial amount of fertilizer comes out of,” Spina said. “I think a lot of Americans immediately think about gas when they hear oil, but the fact is, oil is involved in just about every part of our modern economy.”
“Fertilizer is going to affect agriculture, [oil will affect] the production of copper, jet fuel, plastics…there really is no end to the amount of oil we use,” Spina said. “You’re looking down the barrel of a potential unprecedented shock to our energy markets.”
Spina provided two potential solutions he could see unraveling.
“One, the market will adjust, but if it can’t, [we’ll] adjust by looking at alternatives,” he said.
Spina suggests that these adjustments could lead to items like electric vehicles or other alternative transport methods becoming a more profitable alternative if this conflict continues.
A Prolonged Conflict
The Trump administration has publicly stated that they believe the conflict will be “short-term,” with President Trump even describing it as a “little excursion” in a recent press conference.
“Well, I am not sure the U.S. knows what it’s doing,” Spina said, “I mean, we have heard a couple of different rationales for why they are doing what they are doing. No clear strategy.”
Spina further touched on Israel’s war goals, indicating that they are looking for a regime change at “any cost.”
He went into detail about Iran’s resilience and Trump’s belief that this would be an easy regime change, similar to that of Venezuela.
“I think they believed the Iranian regime would fold immediately. They would kill the supreme leader and a couple of the upper echelon, and it would just implode like Venezuela,” Spina said. “But that’s not what the Iranian regime is, and I think they fundamentally misunderstood the degree at which [the regime] has embedded itself in society.”
When asked about the likelihood of U.S. boots on the ground, Spina believes it’s not a likelihood.
“Israel can’t; it just doesn’t have the capacity. America could, but you’re talking about a country of ninety million people with a very passionate military base. It’s not Iraq, which would just run and flee,” Spina said. “Iran has fundamental identity and a long history. You’re looking at three-to-four hundred thousand troops to placate a place like Iran.”
Spina commented on alternatives to directing U.S. troops being sent to Iran.
“We could imagine Saudi Arabia and a coalition of Gulf States going in, or the [Kurdish people] in the north. It would implicate U.S. back, at least our logistics and military support,” Spina said.
Iran’s Nuclear Program
President Trump has made multiple statements regarding Iran’s nuclear program. In particular, using it as reason for recent attacks. An issue that started decades ago, Iran’s nuclear proliferation has been the reasoning for multiple U.S.-Iran engagements. However, Spina doubts the legitimacy of Trump’s claim.
“It’s always ‘a month away’, ‘a week away’,” Spina said, in reference to Iran’s nuclear weapon proliferation.
“It’s hard to determine a reason, right? The sort of neo-conservative, pro-invasion cohort argues that [Iran] has been our bases and troops in the region for a decade, which is true, but that raises the question of why are we there,” he said. “The idea that it is geopolitically important for us no longer holds water. The U.S. is now an exporter of energy…so it’s kind of hard to find an alternative justification rather than we have a client state in Israel, which is trying to become a hegemon.”
Presidential Conflicts
With the recent failure to pass a democrat-funded war resolution act aiming to curb Trump’s attacks, the question of the president’s power arises.
“This is a bigger issue, which is decades and decades now of the American system putting more and more power into the hands of the president, and Trump has just sort of reveled in what is happening,” Spina said.
Spina addresses that this issue is bipartisan, and compares it to actions that former President Barack Obama took in Libya.
“It was a relatively minor strike compared to this, but the point is still the same. The precedent matters as the more presidents have been able to get away with this, and the more that Congress has not flexed its muscles, the more it becomes an issue,” he said.
Spina concluded by touching on on the impact that these presidential actions could leave.
“This is a massive undertaking that’s beyond anything we can imagine, and it fits with the Trump ethos. He is the executive; the executive acts, and he can do anything. But until Congress tries to flex its muscles again, this unfortunately is going to be the future of American politics. Its almost like Congress has delegated its responsibility to the president because they don’t want to deal with the public,” Spina said.
