Despite the intensity of the operation, remarkably little
official information has been released about the military targets destroyed or
the extent of the damage inflicted. In modern warfare, governments are usually
quick to showcase decisive battlefield successes. The absence of detailed
battle damage assessments has inevitably fueled speculation that the campaign
has yielded fewer tangible results than expected.
Equally concerning are reports that civilian infrastructure
and public utilities have been affected. If the intention is to increase
economic hardship and public suffering in the hope of provoking unrest against
Tehran, such a strategy carries significant legal, moral and political risks.
Under international humanitarian law, deliberate attacks on civilian objects
that are not legitimate military targets could raise serious questions about
compliance with the laws of armed conflict. Greater transparency is therefore
essential.
The broader strategic picture also remains uncertain. One
apparent objective has been to pressure Iran by disrupting regional energy
security through the Strait of Hormuz. Yet global oil markets have remained
relatively calm, with crude prices staying below the psychologically important
threshold of US$100 per barrel. Markets appear unconvinced that energy supplies
will face prolonged disruption.
Attention is now increasingly focused on the Red Sea,
another critical maritime corridor for global trade and Gulf energy exports.
Any escalation there would broaden the conflict, increase risks to
international shipping and place additional economic and political pressure on
Arab oil-exporting states.
Perhaps the campaign's most significant consequence has been
political rather than military. Iranian retaliatory strikes against American
military installations in Gulf countries have heightened regional tensions and
risk fuelling anti-American sentiment. For governments hosting US military
bases, the political cost of continued escalation could become increasingly
difficult to manage.
History offers a consistent lesson - air power can destroy
military assets and infrastructure, but it rarely secures lasting political
victories on its own. If anything, sustained external military pressure often
strengthens national resolve rather than weakens it.
After seven days of strikes, Washington appears to have
achieved neither a decisive military breakthrough nor a clear political
advantage. Unless diplomacy regains priority, the conflict risks expanding
while the prospects for a durable peace continue to diminish.
