In the second week of the war against Iran, it has gone beyond a local conflict, with ramifications that reach the global level. This conflict, aggressively and illegally imposed by the United States and Israel, has not only disrupted diplomatic efforts but has also challenged the foundations of international law.
In response to this aggression, Iran exercises its inherent right to self-defense, a strategic necessity to preserve territorial integrity and national sovereignty. For my country, this war is a war of survival, governed by limited red lines and strategic imperatives.
The need for genuine guarantees
Iran has previously experienced the imposition of war amid delicate negotiations. Past experiences, such as the war with Iraq and recent diplomatic developments, indicate that without genuine and reliable guarantees, the risk of repeated acts of aggression remains.
The experience of two acts of aggression during nuclear negotiations and sanctions – in June 2025 and in February of this year – underlines the importance of deterrent power and defensive preparedness, making it essential that diplomacy be accompanied by operational capacity.
Furthermore, attacks on infrastructure – which signify the failure of the aggressors’ illusions of regime change – as well as demands by opposing parties for control of leadership succession, should not be seen simply as strategic miscalculations.
Rather, they represent a profound inability to understand the meaning of the right to self-determination and the structures that deeply value independence. The election of Ayatollah Seyed Mojtaba Khamenei as the third supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran by the Assembly of Experts is a clear indicator of this commitment to independence.
Military dimensions of war.
From a military perspective, the United States presence in the region is considerable. Currently, three U.S. carrier strike groups are deployed to the area, representing approximately 25 percent of the operational U.S. carrier fleet. While this presence is intended to demonstrate power and exert pressure on Iran, operational realities show that even with such a display, the United States cannot fully secure its assets in the region.
The destruction of two major US radars in the area marks a pivotal moment in the war and highlights Iran’s ability to counter advanced threats and manage the conflict intelligently.
Furthermore, Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz, a route for approximately 20 percent of global oil exports, carries direct strategic consequences, demonstrating Iran’s capacity for effective economic and geopolitical deterrence against external pressures.
Economic and energy implications
The war against Iran has profound effects on energy markets and the global economy. The closure of commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz caused oil prices to skyrocket. Brent crude rose from $73 on February 27 to $107 on March 8 – an increase of more than 40 percent in 10 days.
In addition, about 20 percent of global LNG production was suspended and oil production in several countries with oil reserves in the region decreased. This situation increases pressure on global supply chains, and a prolonged crisis could have even more serious consequences than the COVID-19 pandemic on global markets for food, chemical fertilizers and other essential goods.
Market uncertainty and price volatility are forcing countries and companies that depend on global supply chains to reconsider their policies and economic structures, which could lead to fundamental changes in global trade and energy.
Geopolitical dimensions
Beyond the military and economic dimensions, the war with Iran has broad geopolitical implications. One important consequence is the gradual emergence of divisions between the United States and its Western and regional allies over policies toward Tehran. Divergent economic interests, different security perspectives and regional rivalries are likely to weaken the traditional cohesion of the Western alliance.
The American narrative of a unilateral victory in the war primarily responds to domestic needs to show power and political legitimacy rather than reflect realities on the ground. Indeed, the American effort to control domestic public opinion differs markedly from operational realities in the region.
Furthermore, the role of non-Western powers such as China, India and Russia are important in this equation. These countries can become key variables in international diplomacy, energy markets and regional stability.
Strategic and long-term consequences
The war imposed against Iran could redefine the regional and global balance of power. Growing uncertainty in global markets, divisions among Western powers, and Iran’s growing strategic importance in regional and energy equations point to emerging geopolitical shifts.
This crisis demonstrates that for my country, military deterrence, proactive diplomacy, national security guarantees and crisis management are fundamental pillars to counter complex threats. The coordinated interaction between defensive capabilities and diplomacy can prevent the recurrence of aggressive acts and enable crisis management at the regional and global level.
The war imposed against Iran represents a multidimensional crisis with military, economic, geopolitical and human aspects. By relying on its inherent right to self-defense, Iran maintains its lines of survival and has demonstrated its ability to confront advanced aggression.
Past experiences underscore the need for genuine guarantees in international negotiations and diplomacy, and the role of operational deterrence. The consequences of this war range from rising oil prices and disruptions in global supply chains to fractures within Western alliances and shifts in regional power dynamics.
Ultimately, this war serves as a clear example of Iran’s focus on the importance of deterrent power, assured diplomacy and intelligent crisis management, showing that any miscalculation by opposing parties could have long-term and structural consequences for regional and global security.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Al Jazeera.
