The ongoing conflict involving Iran, Israel and the United States has entered an uncertain phase nearly ten days after it began, raising concerns about global energy markets, regional stability and wider geopolitical consequences.
Speaking to Nitin Gokhale, Editor StratNews Global, writer and former journalist MJ Akbar said the war appears to have been launched with assumptions that may not have fully accounted for Iran’s response.
Akbar said one of the early miscalculations was the belief that Iran would be unable or unwilling to respond effectively. According to him, Iranian leaders had already indicated that they had drawn lessons from earlier confrontations and strengthened their capabilities.
“When you undertake something as serious and consequential as war, then it has to be thought through,” Akbar said. “I am sure it was thought over, but it was not thought through.”
According to him, one of the first mistakes was assuming Iran would not put up a strong resistance.
“The very first mistake… was that they thought Iran was a pushover,” he said, adding that Iran had already indicated it had “learned the lessons from last year’s conflict.”
“They confuse the leader with the state,” he said. “They thought the elimination of the Supreme Leader would automatically lead to a diminution or even a collapse of the state itself.”
According to Akbar, Iran has built a system over decades with functioning institutions, including the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which plays a key role in defending the state.
He further observed that the objectives of the war appeared to change quickly. And, said that within a short period the goal seemed to shift from regime change to what he called regime adjustment, raising questions about the clarity of the strategic objectives behind the conflict.
The discussion also highlighted the growing importance of asymmetric warfare. Akbar noted that relatively inexpensive drones could damage costly military installations, pointing to the changing dynamics of modern warfare.
Akbar also pointed to what he described as a rapid shift in the stated objectives of the conflict.
“War objective is fundamental to war,” he said. “Within 48 hours the war objective changed from regime change to regime adjustment.”
The conflict has also highlighted the changing nature of warfare, particularly the growing use of inexpensive technology to challenge sophisticated military systems.
“They have lost some of the most sophisticated weaponry,” Akbar said, noting that “a $20,000 Shaheed drone is bringing down a $1 billion radar installation.”
Such developments, he suggested, could have long-term implications for the global defence industry.
Impact on Energy
He said the conflict has already affected global energy markets, with oil prices rising amid concerns about disruptions in supply from a region that remains central to the world’s energy system.
Akbar also suggested that the diversion of American focus to West Asia could have consequences for other geopolitical theatres. With Washington engaged in the new conflict, attention on the war in Ukraine could shift.
Beyond the battlefield, Akbar said the conflict could reshape geopolitical dynamics. One potential beneficiary, he suggested, could be Russia.
“Russia… because Ukraine has been forgotten,” he said, arguing that American resources and attention were now being diverted toward the new conflict.
Turning to the Gulf region, Akbar said countries there had spent years building an image of stability to attract tourism, investment and financial activity. A prolonged conflict, he said, could affect that perception of security.
Implications for India
Akbar warned that India would inevitably face pressure from higher energy prices. However, he noted that the economy today is stronger and more resilient than it was during earlier oil shocks such as the crisis of the 1970s.
He also pointed out that India’s position remains distinct in the current environment. “Between the Mediterranean and the Arabian Sea, they are the only Muslim community not involved in a very difficult war,” he said, referring to Indian Muslims.
“You have to stop saying ‘Muslim world’,” he said. “Different countries will be loyal to their national interests.”
Looking at the wider global response, he also cautioned against interpreting geopolitical developments through religious lenses.
As the conflict continues, Akbar said its long-term consequences will depend on how quickly the war is brought under control and whether diplomacy can limit further escalation in an already volatile region.
