In Politics Among Nations, Hans Morgenthau—one of the founding fathers of realist political theory—cites the Crimean War (1853–1856), in which Britain and France went to war against Russia in defense of the Ottoman Empire, to warn statesmen: “Never allow your small ally to drag you into a major war.”
Following the October 7 attacks by Hamas and Israel’s brutal and destructive retaliation in Gaza, the shadow of a new war looms over the Middle East—this time between the United States and Iran. In recent weeks, warlike rhetoric has escalated in Washington. Although diplomatic backchannels between Iran and the U.S. in Oman have inspired hope, the success of such efforts remains uncertain. Ostensibly, American threats of war stem from attacks on its interests—but in truth, the U.S. is increasingly acting as a proxy force for the regional ambitions of Benjamin Netanyahu’s extremist government. This shift signals not only a decline in U.S. hegemony in the region but also presents grave dangers to global security and the future of the international order.
From Global Hegemon to Proxy Power
Since the end of World War II, America’s strategy in the Middle East has been grounded in controlling energy resources, suppressing nationalist and leftist movements, and supporting aligned regimes. However, from the disastrous war in Iraq in 2003 to the strategic failure in Afghanistan—and the eventual handover of both that country and Syria to the very Islamist extremists the U.S. had claimed to fight for over two decades—the signs of America’s gradual hegemonic decline in the region have become increasingly evident. Meanwhile, rival powers such as China and Russia have filled the void—China through diplomatic breakthroughs like the Iran-Saudi deal, and Russia via military entrenchment in Syria. Other actors like Turkey, France, and the EU are also striving to reshape the region, with new players emerging constantly in the current geopolitical vacuum.
In this chaotic environment, U.S. elites have once again turned to their default solution: militarization. But what’s new is that U.S. policy in the region is no longer driven by independent strategic interests. Instead, it is increasingly aligned with the ideological and security agendas of Israel. From Trump’s withdrawal from the Iran deal to Biden’s unconditional support of Israel in the Gaza war, U.S. foreign policy has become subservient to Israeli interests—fueling Israel’s war machine rather than pursuing American objectives. The repeated threats of war with Iran, especially since Trump took office, are merely the latest chapter in this dangerous trajectory.
Iran: A Functional Enemy to Preserve the Status Quo
For years, Israel has depicted Iran as a “nuclear and terrorist threat,” galvanizing its domestic population and securing unconditional support from Washington. In U.S. policy circles, Iran has become a convenient scapegoat—justifying sanctions, sabotage, cyberattacks, and even preparations for full-scale war.
But this narrative dangerously oversimplifies a complex and historical society. Iran, with its long-standing resistance to foreign domination—from British and Russian imperialism to the 1953 U.S.-backed coup—has sought a political model beyond war and militarism. Ignoring this legacy paves the way for a destructive conflict—one that benefits neither the Iranian people, the American public, nor regional security. A war with Iran is not rooted in strategic necessity, but rather in three driving forces: Israeli paranoia, the influence of hawkish U.S. lobbies, and the insatiable greed of the military-industrial complex.
War as a Tool to Restore Hegemony
In eras of imperial decline, wars often serve as anesthetics—temporary restoratives of fading power. Faced with domestic crises like economic inequality, political disillusionment, and geopolitical retreat, the U.S. is tempted to revive its standing through a major conflict. Yet history shows that such wars are costly and futile. They produce no real winners—only universal loss. The U.S., haunted by the Vietnam syndrome of the 20th century, has repeatedly fallen into similar traps in the 21st.
Even during Biden’s presidency, not only did the U.S. military presence in the region expand, but arms sales to Israel also reached their peak. At the same time, congressional rhetoric on Iran grew increasingly aggressive, with senators like Tom Cotton openly calling for direct military strikes. This trend escalated during the Trump era, particularly in his second term, when his administration not only began to repeat the pattern of endless wars but also effectively lost the ability to say “no” to Israeli demands.
Meanwhile, both major U.S. political parties, heavily influenced by pro-Israel lobbies like AIPAC, have adopted Netanyahu’s talking points wholesale—behaving as if it is Iran that holds their interests hostage, while in reality, it is Israel that has tied its own goals to U.S. policy, distorting the picture entirely for the White House. These policies reflect less a coherent strategy than a deep fear—fear of a multipolar world—and a profound confusion over how to redefine America’s role within it.
The Costs of Subservience
Becoming Israel’s proxy carries a high price. Any war with Iran is likely to drag other regional powers into the conflict, destabilize the Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf, shake global energy markets, and inflict profound suffering—especially at the intersection of the Middle East energy crisis and Europe’s ongoing energy woes.
Such a war would also reveal America’s double standards: a self-proclaimed champion of democracy that unwaveringly supports a regime guilty of systemic human rights violations and apartheid structures. Palestinians cannot seek justice from Israeli settlers who torch their homes, nor can they appeal to international bodies like the ICC or UNHRC because U.S. vetoes shield Israel from accountability.
Continuing this path of blind support erodes America’s moral legitimacy and strategic autonomy. Most Americans do not want another war. Polls show that the majority of voters are tired of military interventions and see endless aid to Israel as wasteful. The real needs of Americans—healthcare, education, and housing—are not served by endless war.
The Alternative Path: Diplomacy and Decolonization
If the United States truly seeks peace, stability, and a better future for the region, it must change course. That means rejecting any military strike on Iran, returning to diplomacy, and reviving the nuclear deal. Cruel sanctions that harm ordinary Iranians must be lifted, and dialogue channels must be reopened on the basis of mutual respect. But the deeper shift must be this: removing Israel from the center of U.S. Middle East policy.
True peace will only emerge when the roots of violence are addressed—occupation, structural inequality, and the legacy of Western colonialism. Redefining U.S. foreign policy based on regional justice would not only prevent catastrophe but also lay the foundation for a more equitable 21st-century global order. This requires a serious paradigm shift in how America views the Middle East—not through the lens of Israel, but from its own strategic and ethical perspective.
Empire or Liberation?
The choice facing Trump’s America—and the U.S. more broadly—is clear: continue down the path of empire, war, and dependence on a dangerous ally, or move toward liberation, peace, and foreign policy independence. The future of the Middle East—and perhaps the global order—depends on that decision.
