United States has passed a law to carry out pre-emptive strike against any country without prior notice if its interests are in danger or threatened. Secondly US wants no country should acquire nuclear capability except those allowed by US. This tantamount to attack on countries sovereignty. World has witnessed the blood shed took place in Libya, Iraq and Syria and Afghanistan. The red lines were crossed when President of Venezuela was arrested after successful operation under taken by forces of US. The world witnessed this high handedness and UN failed to take any action. In any case countries with veto powers has rendered UN totally ineffective in guarding the sovereignty and independence of smaller nations, now might is right prevails perhaps new world order. But some nations show courage and stand tall against any aggressor. A new order is being imposed by bringing Regime Change by US to have government of their choice. Wherever regimes have been changed people have paid very heavy price.
In case of attack on Iran by US and Israel, Donald Trump deployed US aircraft carriers and naval airpower brought in the Arabian Sea was a show of force to deter Iran but it made no difference to Iran as country was fully geared to face any attack. Iran is a different country. From day one Iran has been conveying its willingness to discuss issue in peaceful manner and were also conveying the super power alternatively that they are ready to face any attack from Israel and US. President Trump knew any aggression against Iran would unleash forces that would be beyond his control that could seriously undermine the US hegemony over world events. This is what exactly has happened.
Trump does not want war but by assembling the naval fleet he has placed himself in a difficult position. Attack on Iran jointly by US and Israel has failed to achieve any tangible result except killing around 48 officials including spiritual leader Khamnei and failed to achieve desired result of regime change. Instead it has further United the country. Trump definitely was not prepared for this great set back and now backtracking without showing any tangible results has fatally hurt his presidency.Iran is aware of the Trump dilemma. They realise they need to give safe passage to US without hurting his ego to withdraw aircraft carriers from the Arabian and the Mediterranean Seas and enter into negotiations. That by itself should not be a deal breaker for Iran, which it hopes will result in removal of economic sanctions the US has unilaterally imposed on the nation. Even if the sanctions are not lifted and Iran agrees to limit the Uranium enrichment below the weapons grade level but high enough to conduct medicinal research, it will give Trump something to gloat about how he has scuttled any chance of Iran developing nuclear weapons. And in the process if the danger of a war in the region is averted, it would be a partial success. For the rest of the world, particularly the affluent Arabian states a nightmare scenario would have been averted.The United States has adopted an increasingly aggressive security doctrine, claiming the right to carry out pre-emptive strikes against any country it perceives as threatening its interests – without notice or clear legal mandate. Critics argue this policy effectively undermines national sovereignty and international law by asserting that only a select group of powers may develop or control nuclear capabilities. Recent military action against Iran starkly illustrates the dangers of this approach. On 28 February 2026, coordinated strikes by the United States and Israel targeted multiple locations in Iran, including cities such as Tehran and key infrastructure. The offensive, code-named “Operation Lion’s Roar” by Israeli officials, involved airborne and missile attacks aimed at Iranian leadership and military assets. The strikes reportedly killed high-ranking officials and have triggered widespread retaliation across the region. Within days, the conflict escalated into a broader regional confrontation. Iran launched missiles and drones at Israel and U.S. facilities in the Gulf, while Hezbollah, the Iran-aligned Lebanese group, began firing projectiles into northern Israel. The United States and Israel responded with expanded aerial operations in Lebanon, widening the war beyond Iran’s borders. Humanitarian consequences have been severe. Iranian state-linked sources reported hundreds of deaths as a result of the sustained strikes, with civilian casualties rising as hostilities continue. These attacks occurred despite ongoing negotiations between Tehran and Washington over Iran’s nuclear and missile programmes. Many legal experts and international commentators argue that the military action violated the UN Charter’s fundamental principles of sovereignty and non-intervention. Forcible regime change or pre-emptive military strikes against another nation without clear Security Council authorization are widely seen as breaches of international law. The conflict’s global impact has been profound. Key shipping routes, including the Strait of Hormuz, have seen disruptions; oil prices and shipping costs have risen; and diplomatic tensions between major powers have intensified. Closure of air spaces has brought miseries to travelers they are stuck up at various airports in the region. Jump in oil prices is another bomb shell. Tehran’s allies, including Hezbollah and other regional proxies, have expanded their engagement, raising fears of a prolonged and more devastating war. Critics contend that the poor track record of regime-change efforts in countries like Iraq, Libya, and Syria demonstrates the dangers of military intervention as a tool of foreign policy. These campaigns have often led to prolonged instability and high civilian tolls, with limited strategic gains for intervening powers. The current conflict with Iran follows a similar pattern of escalation and unpredictability.
Whether through negotiated limits on nuclear enrichment, renewed diplomacy under UN supervision, or another political solution, many argue that a military resolution will only deepen suffering and destabilize the wider Middle East. The crisis underscores the need for stronger international mechanisms to protect national sovereignty and prevent future large-scale conflicts.
