26/06/2025

THURSDAY | JUNE 26, 2025

11

Power, perception and fading myths T HE question is no longer whether the United States will fully enter the Iran Israel conflict – it already has. Even before the recent air strikes on Iranian country unable to honour treaties across administrations or restrain its war machine, even under a president who consistently and publicly opposes full-scale conflict. The contradiction only makes sense once it is clear he is not leading a unified state but wrestling with a system that wages war on autopilot. Second, it will consolidate Iran’s internal unity, transforming fragmented command into a war-forged coherence. COMMENT by Dr Rais Hussin

nuclear sites, US involvement was clear. Satellite intelligence, drone coordination, aerial refuelling – all were already in motion long before the bombs fell, as openly acknowledged by the Department of Defence. The Pentagon may not have formally declared war but its machinery has been in motion for some time. What remains uncertain is not the extent of US involvement but the degree of its exposure. And what stands to be exposed is not just a fragile regional balance but the broken architecture of global power itself. At the heart of this uncertainty lies a simple but devastating truth: the US is no longer a unified geopolitical actor. It is a fragmented entity, split between a corrupt, inertia-driven military-industrial complex and a political outsider in Donald Trump, who is openly attempting to dismantle that very machine. These two factions not only pursue different goals – they operate from entirely different paradigms. And nowhere is this more consequential than in the Middle East. Trump’s vision, for all its contradictions, is largely inward-looking. He seeks to recentre American political life around domestic repair: consolidating a fractured union, decoupling from unsustainable global entanglements, and perhaps most critically, preventing the use of nuclear weapons, whether in Ukraine or Iran. Trump understands, however crudely, that a single nuclear incident would not trigger a “regional escalation” but a global existential collapse. And with no escape plan to Mars yet, this is not a bluff. The corrupt US military-industrial establishment, by contrast, thrives on perpetual motion. Conflict is not a failure of diplomacy – it is a business model: a profit driven ecosystem fed by dollar dominance, endless war cycles abroad and technological intimidation. Today’s warfare has become a lucrative multisectoral enterprise, spanning semi conductors, satellite constellations and private security, with contractors and mercenary firms now plugging battlefield gaps in real time. At its core lies the US dollar’s “exorbitant privilege”, allowing the system to borrow cheaply and spend endlessly, sustaining a machinery that now runs largely on autopilot.

Third, it will push global audiences, especially in the Global South, into open narrative opposition against American-led coalitions. The US will not lose only militarily; it will lose morally, discursively and civilisationally. And finally, Israel – whose political time is already expiring – may find itself truly alone. Once buffered by US impunity, it now stands exposed. No longer the centre of moral gravity, it has become a symbol of collapse. The Zionist project has entered its final and unsustainable phase. Its survival, once premised on external support, now hinges on a system: the US war engine – itself in terminal entropy. Ironically, Trump’s current strategy may be to delay rather than confront. Let the deep state drain its ammunition, burn its credibility and reveal its own dysfunction. From this vantage, Iran becomes not a threat but a mirror – exposing the limits of an empire and the rise of a world no longer beholden to it. China and Russia will quietly benefit. So too will Trump, whose own domestic restoration relies on exposing the very system that seeks endless war. Some now expect Russia or China to intervene directly but that outcome is unlikely and deeply dangerous. Both powers understand that open escalation would trigger cascading consequences on the scale of a nuclear event, drawing the entire world into catastrophe. Russia, in particular, has demonstrated a different doctrine under Vladimir Putin: limited, ground-based intervention aimed at specific strategic objectives as it did in Syria against Isis. But that model is neither necessary nor appropriate here. Iran is holding the line. The message has already landed. There is no need for the world to start shooting at itself. What this moment reveals is not merely a geopolitical contest; it is a struggle over meaning itself – between those rewriting the story of power and those clinging to a script that no longer fits the stage. DrRais Hussin is the founder of Emir Research, a think-tank focused on strategic policy recommendations based on rigorous research. Comments: letters@thesundaily.com military action. This type of thinking, which ignores the historical development and unique contexts of different nation-states, hinders genuine dialogue and meaningful engagement. Way forward It is the self-seeking interest among big powers and ideological inclinations that have brought much conflict and suffering in the world. Genuine concerns for human rights and dignity should start by listening to the cries and struggles of people on the ground, who are the ones suffering immensely from war and destruction. Therefore, it is vital that nation-states committed to justice and peace speak the truth that comes from the common oppressed people rather than self-seeking elitists with their own agendas, perpetuating injustice and senseless wars. Ronald Benjamin Secretary Association for Welfare, Community and Dialogue

Today’s warfare has become a lucrative multisectoral enterprise, spanning semiconductors, satellite constellations and private security, with contractors and mercenary firms now plugging battlefield gaps in real time. – AFP

itself. And nowhere is this more apparent than in the US-Israel doctrine where obsolete logic now conceals deliberate brutality. But while the old powers cling to fading myths, other states are undergoing a different kind of reckoning. Iran, too, is divided but its fracture line runs differently. On one side are patriotic factions seeking strategic sovereignty and civilisational dignity; on the other are compromised elements aligned with foreign interests. Tehran just demonstrated this: state security forces recently arrested alleged Mossad-linked operatives, including those reportedly tasked with supplying missile targeting data. Unlike the US, Iran’s internal war is now being clarified. The recent escalation has acted as a national x-ray, revealing who responds to national imperatives and who follows imported scripts. In this sense, the war is not just defensive; it is diagnostic – a purge of illusion. What then does it mean if the US formally escalates? First, it will accelerate its own internal collapse. A direct war with Iran would expose the incoherence of US foreign policy: a from the chaos. The veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council are more focused on safeguarding their strategic geopolitical interests than addressing the plight of the oppressed. For example, observers in the region argue that Israel’s attack on Iran is driven less by concerns over uranium enrichment and more by Iran’s steadfast support for the Palestinian cause. To this day, neither Israel nor the United States has provided any concrete evidence that Iran’s leadership has instructed its scientists to develop nuclear weapons. The broader geopolitical interest of both nations appears to be preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state, with any form of support for the Palestinian cause met with

Add to this the revolving door between Pentagon officials and defence contractors, along with the constant inflation of threats to justify spending and the result is clear: even absurd provocations are approved – not out of necessity but sheer momentum. As Iran’s leadership put it with cutting clarity – the US is no longer striking strategic targets; it is striking at mere smoke. The enduring lie of the nuclear threat, once the US deep state’s ultimate trump card, is rapidly losing meaning. In an era of advanced non-nuclear weaponry – from Russia’s hypersonic arsenal to Iran’s drone precision – the deterrence logic that shaped the Cold War no longer applies. Why deploy weapons that guarantee mutual annihilation when conventional strikes can now deliver scalpel-like precision and massive strategic disruption, disabling satellites, air defences or command grids, without radioactive fallout or indiscriminate civilian destruction? Yet the old guard clings to outdated myths, and with them, the dangerous illusion of control. In this light, any state that still pursues collective punishment under the guise of deterrence is not defending itself; it is exposing reminding world leaders that “war is always a defeat” and that “nothing is lost with peace; everything can be lost with war.” The United Nations, which is supposed to prevent wars through dialogue and uphold justice and human rights, seems to be increasingly impotent. Its collective power has been usurped by veto-holding members who perpetuate global injustice by vetoing resolutions that could help bring warring parties to the negotiating table. The question is: Why is there a lack of resolve among prominent world leaders to pursue for peace and justice? Self-interest prevails over common good In the global arena, national self-interest often takes precedence over the common good. Conflicts are increasingly viewed through the lens of strategic, economic or military gain rather than as opportunities to uphold moral responsibility. Instead of engaging with warring parties to promote peace grounded in shared humanity, many nations prioritise what they stand to benefit

Stop waging war in the name of peace

LETTERS

letters@thesundaily.com

IT is unfortunate that world leaders capable of pursuing diplomacy and peace remain passive as wars rage across the Middle East and Ukraine, and with the latest escalation between Iran and Israel. In Gaza, Palestinians are said to be experiencing genocide while the Russia-Ukraine conflict continues with unrelenting brutality. This appears to be a defining moment in which military power and weaponry hold sway over moral rectitude. Many innocent people are dying because the so-called world leaders have failed to listen to and protect those who suffer most from war. In a powerful statement, Pope Leo warned that the “atrocity” of modern scientific weapons risks driving combatants towards a level of barbarism even greater than in the past. He echoes his predecessor, the late Pope Francis, in

severe opposition. Ideological chasm

The other aspect is the ideological framing of global conflicts, particularly in the West, where complex issues are often reduced to simplistic binaries such as democracy versus authoritarianism or uranium enrichment versus