US President Donald Trump’s approach to the war with Iran has been marked by a reliance on instinct rather than strategic planning, leading to a series of setbacks and unintended consequences. According to the BBC. Trump’s decisions have been driven by gut feelings rather than the detailed intelligence and strategic assessments used by his predecessors.

Impact on International Relations

The war. Which began with airstrikes on Iran. Has had far-reaching implications for international relations — the US and Israel expected a quick victory, but instead, they are facing a resilient Iranian regime that continues to fight back. The regime in Tehran has demonstrated a strong will to survive, despite the loss of its supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and other high-ranking officials.

According to the BBC. Trump’s instinct-driven strategy has led to a lack of clear political direction, which has undermined the effectiveness of the US military; the absence of a well-thought-out plan has made it difficult to achieve a decisive outcome in the conflict.

The Iranian regime, founded after the 1979 revolution, has been built on a foundation of religious ideology and a network of military alliances — this has allowed it to withstand the initial shocks of the US and Israeli airstrikes. The regime has also expanded the war by attacking its Gulf Arab neighbors and American bases in the region.

Economic Consequences of the War

The economic ramifications of the conflict have been significant. Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical waterway for global oil trade, has disrupted about 20% of the world’s oil supply. This has caused global financial markets to react sharply, with stock indices experiencing volatility.

The BBC reports that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz has forced the US and Israel to reconsider their approach to the conflict. The narrow waterway has proven to be a more effective deterrent than the expensive network of alliances Iran has built over the years.

Iran’s ability to control the Strait of Hormuz using inexpensive drones has given it a strategic advantage. This has forced the US and Israel to confront the reality that capturing and occupying the cliffs on either side of the Strait would be a significant challenge.

Strategic Failures and Future Implications

According to the BBC, Trump’s failure to plan for the aftermath of the war has left the US and Israel in a precarious position. The initial expectation of a quick victory has given way to a prolonged conflict with no clear end in sight.

The former deputy commander of NATO, General Sir Richard Shirreff, noted on the BBC’s Today Programme that any war game simulating an attack on Iran would have shown that the Islamic Major Guard Corps would close the Strait of Hormuz. This highlights the importance of planning for both the start and the end of a conflict.

Trump’s instinct-driven approach has also led to a lack of coordination with allies. The ‘axis of resistance’ includes groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen. These groups have been able to threaten Israel and disrupt global shipping routes, further complicating the situation.

The BBC reports that the Houthis have fired a barrage of missiles at Israel for the first time since the war began. If they resume their attacks on shipping in the Red Sea, Saudi Arabia could lose its western sea route for oil exports to Asia. This would have severe economic consequences for the region.

The Red Sea has its own choke point, the Bab al Mandab strait, which is as important for world trade as the Strait of Hormuz. If the Houthis decide to escalate their attacks on shipping in Bab al Mandab and further south, they could cut off the route from Asia to Europe through the Suez Canal, creating an even worse global economic emergency.

As the conflict continues, the need for a clear and strategic approach becomes more apparent. Trump’s instinct-driven decisions have left the US and Israel in a difficult position, with no clear path to victory. The war has highlighted the importance of planning, adaptability, and a long-term strategy in modern warfare.