The Time of Indecisive War

In the small details, the features of the large phase sometimes hide. In the operation to rescue an American pilot from within Iran, the most significant event was not the success of the evacuation, but the United States' necessity to destroy its own planes, fearing they would fall into the hands of Iranians who proved their capabilities in cloning technologies and utilizing them; this was due to the long siege and sanctions that forced them to develop their capabilities independently without relying on external support. It also highlights the importance of the "image of victory" that each side does everything possible to obtain or prevent the enemy from achieving.

It is likely that these planes were struck by Iranian fire and were no longer able to leave, and it is very unlikely that there was a technical malfunction in two planes simultaneously. In this case, equipment is completely destroyed to prevent the enemy from gaining insights from it, as it is a reservoir of secrets and advanced technologies. Undoubtedly, the Iranians are now searching for any piece among its ashes that they may find intact or analyzable.

At its core, this incident indicates that wars, in essence, are not only a struggle for control but for knowledge. The danger is no longer just in losing your plane or any other equipment, but in it falling into the hands of an enemy that reveals its secrets. Superiority is not measured solely by what you possess, but by your ability to protect the secrets of what you have.

The world, at this moment, is not living a single war, but rather several confrontations, in the Middle East, in the ongoing genocide in Gaza, the legalization of the execution of prisoners, to the Ukraine war which has turned into a prolonged war of attrition, and in energy markets, where supply itself has become a battlefield, using prices, routes, and threats as pressure tools no less effective than missiles and mines.

The war against Hezbollah and Lebanon, which seemed to be resolved, with the party appearing weak and paralyzed, is returning to its starting point with renewed momentum. Residents of border towns in northern Israel are begging the government to relocate them away from the frontline, as not a single hour passes without these towns facing sirens and missile bombardment, and fear of human infiltration operations. Meanwhile, Israel persists in its total erasure policy of villages in southern Lebanon and the southern suburbs of Beirut in a Gaza-style operation, threatening to apply the same in Iran. Additionally, the immense Syrian reaction to the death penalty law for prisoners has been characterized by its intensity across Syrian territory, warranting a special article to understand and dissect it, as it is more than just a momentary reaction; it is clear that it is a coordinated response both from the public and officially. We add to this the calls from countries like Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey, and others to halt the escalation; as it represents a danger at a global level, not just for the parties involved.

Within the United States, there are unprecedented demonstrations in various states against the war, and mass dismissals from leadership positions, some seemingly refusing to implement Trump's policy, or failing in what Trump wants.

Inside the Democratic Party, increasing questions for the first time are being raised regarding the limits of support for Israel, its material, moral, and political costs, and this will be a central focus in the American midterm elections before the end of this year. This does not mean an imminent overturn in American policy, but it indicates a shift in the public mood, especially as this support and these wars affect the American citizen's pocket, who was promised that Trump's antics would bring him prosperity through leveraging and plundering the returns of energy sources and wealth from various parts of the world, not just the Gulf states, which began with the arrest of the Venezuelan president and then declared a desire to change the regime in Iran. However, the results of these antics seem likely to be costly for everyone.

On the other hand, Gulf Arab countries find themselves confronted with a more complex equation. The ally that was viewed as a guarantor of their security is no longer capable, and perhaps no longer willing, to play the old traditional role. Not because American power has suddenly declined, but because its ability to impose quick resolutions is not what it used to be, and Trump's threat to use "maximum force" has not worked with the regime in Iran, which has been cornered between two options: total submission to the desires of Trump and Netanyahu after decades of declared hostility toward America and Israel, or being forced to defend itself at all costs.

What we are witnessing appears to be signs of a transitional phase, where conflicts proliferate without exploding into one comprehensive confrontation—a world changing slowly through successive crises, not through a single decisive event. In this reality, regional countries should begin searching for new balances, or at least for a wider margin of independence in decision-making.