How The Iran War Could Radical Reset The Global Order

Anil Trigunayat

Between the US and Israel on the one side and Iran on the other, several red lines have been crossed that will change the future regional and global dynamic. This was a war that had been avoided for far too long due to the very repercussions it would have for the global economy, security and stability, but that line of sanity was breached on February 28 when Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu decided to advance the war for their own geopolitical ends, which were unclear, especially in the case of the US, since

Israel has been wanting to take out the roots of the ever-present threat in the Islamic regime led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and his successor Ayatollah Ali Khamenei for nearly five decades.

Several disjointed statements coming out of the US administration clearly indicated that Israel was in the driving seat. This was admitted by Secretary of State Marco Rubio when he claimed that Israel was determined to attack Iran and the US had to join in. Reasons for that are obvious. But then Trump did not want to be left behind and claimed the first shot, which included the attacks on a little girls’ school in Minab, killing nearly 180 girls. The war has passed last June’s 12-day limit, with more mayhem in the making as none of the sides is scaling down the intent to escalate. There will be no winners for sure, but resilience may prevail.

It has usually been perceived that President Trump does not prefer wars, but in his second term his threats and actions have spoken otherwise, with claims of territory, resources and breaches of sovereignty from Canada to Greenland and Venezuela to Iran, with more to come. International law and rules of engagement no longer seem to exist, let alone apply.

The ongoing war has caused tremendous restrictions on energy supply and sea lanes of communication, including through the Strait of Hormuz. No doubt crude prices have gone up and the global economic stress factor has multiplied manifold, let alone the humanitarian costs and the ensuing disaster, at least an economic one, for all in the game and those on the periphery.

The economic effects of the maritime escalation are becoming more visible. Reports indicate that major oil producers in the region, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Iraq, Kuwait and Bahrain, have already begun reducing production because of the situation in the Strait of Hormuz, and have invoked force majeure, with an estimated 6.2 to 6.9 million barrels per day effectively offline. Asian economies, including India, China, Japan and South Korea, will face serious impact.

As the war goes on, while the strategies and objectives have been unclear and confusing, and the world appears to be a bystander as feeble calls for de-escalation are heard, it is obvious that regime change and regime survival are pitted against one another in a devastating manner. The decapitation strategy has not yielded the desired change.

The killing of Ayatollah Khamenei during Ramzan has resulted in his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, taking over — in many ways extraordinary since the late Supreme Leader did not subscribe to hereditary power transfer — who by all counts is going to be more hardline and is already in a fully vengeful mode due to personal, national and civilisational reasons.

Given the deep penetration of Israeli intelligence, the threat of eliminating him is equally real unless President Putin has directly warned President Trump in his most recent phone call, when the US is looking for some kind of an off-ramp. In any case, even if that happens they will select another who could be more radical. Possessing a nuclear weapon has also become compulsory as per Iranian leadership.

Regime survival through a flexible and Raktbeej strategy might be the Iranian game plan, counting on civilisational strength and hoping that the underlying youth discontent with the government and regime, and potential insurgency by ethnic groups like Kurds, Azeris and Baloch, will not acquire critical mass.

It was clear that pursuant to the ongoing discussions between Tehran and Washington with Omani mediation, an agreement had almost been reached where, for the first time, Iran had agreed to desist from possession or processing of enriched uranium. That might no longer be an option for the new leaders. On February 27, one day before the bombs dropped, Oman’s Foreign Minister Busaidi said a “breakthrough” had been reached.

Trump spoke to Putin asking to secure an off-ramp as Iranians launched the 35th round of strikes on Israel — reduced in numbers but far more lethal and causing damage as reportedly THAAD and Patriot systems have either been neutralised or exhausted. Decapitation has not led to disability, though destruction is the end result. Perhaps we are heading into a 1973 scenario when oil as a weapon is in full display, with SLOCs choked and GVCs throughout stressed. Trump’s unilateralism is hurting even America and its reputation this time, even if their military-industrial complex will eventually gain. The US economy, stressed as it is, will find it difficult to safely exit this unnecessary fracas without unacceptable costs.

Comments from both sides are ominous for peace any time soon. “Unconditional surrender” and Trump selecting the leader are the kind of conditionalities and derangement that dictate policy, at least overtly. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of the Iranian Majlis, made Tehran’s position even clearer. He said Iran is certainly not pursuing a ceasefire and instead believes it must deliver a decisive blow that becomes a lasting lesson to the aggressor. In this view, Iran is trying to break what it sees as Israel’s preferred cycle of war, negotiation, ceasefire and then renewed war. War is moving toward a sharper confrontation over chokepoints, infrastructure and endurance.

This is a war between arch enemies of nearly half a century. This is a war between two radical ideologies. This is a war between North and South. This is a war between regime change and regime survival. This is a war between civilisation and non-civilisation. This is a war between brute power and resilience. This is unlike other wars, as the fight to the finish defines it. This is a war within the Abrahamic family yet again engulfing the world.

This is a war of attrition with both sides possessing escalation dominance. This could become a war between the West and the CIRN (China, Iran, Russia and North Korea) going forward — a hot and Cold War 2.0. This could even turn into a battle space for the hegemonistic ambitions of regional and extra-regional actors.

About the Contributor

Anil Trigunayat , Former Indian Ambassador to Jordan, Libya, Malta and Distinguished Fellow and Head of the West Asia Experts Group at the prestigious Vivekananda International Foundation.

This article was first published in The First Post as “How the Iran war could radical reset the global order “on March 13, 2026.

Disclaimer: All views expressed in the article belong solely to the author and not necessarily to the organisation.