With regional stability hanging in the balance, the world watches anxiously as West Asia braces for the potential fallout of escalating hostilities
On July 3, 1988, the US Navy’s USS Vincennes, in an act of brazen military overreach, shot down Iran Air Flight 655, a civilian airliner carrying 290 passengers, over the Persian Gulf. The Navy’s justification-that this was an “unintentional error”- belies the harsh reality: this was not a mistake, but rather an emblematic instance of Western indifference to the lives of those deemed expendable.
The Navy mistook a commercial flight for an enemy fighter jet, launching two surface-to-air missiles and killing all aboard. Yet, the US response was not to acknowledge a moral failing, but to double down on its denial, offering neither a genuine apology nor reparations to the victims’ families. This tragedy was a grim reminder of the West’s long-standing practice of dehumanising the peoples of West Asia in its relentless pursuit of geopolitical dominance. For the Iranian people, it was not merely a military blunder; it was a stark dismissal of their humanity, reinforcing the deeply entrenched belief in Western circles that the lives of those beyond its borders are, at best, collateral damage in the pursuit of power.
The echoes of this tragedy persist today, amplified by the volatile relationship between the US and Iran. Just days after Donald Trump’s re-election, the US government claimed to have uncovered a plot by Iran to assassinate the president. Iran vehemently rejected these allegations, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi dismissing them as a “third-rate comedy” and accusing the US of fabricating a narrative to justify further aggression. Araqchi’s derision-mocking the absurdity of an assassin “sitting in Iran and talking online to the FBI”-renewed the deep mistrust that defines the US-Iran relationship.
Now that Trump has secured a second term and will become the 47th President of the USA, it is clear that his foreign policy, especially towards Iran, could become far more aggressive, with disastrous consequences. His planned appointments of hawkish figures - such as Pete Hegseth as Secretary of Defence, Steven C Witkoff as Special Envoy on West Asia Affairs and Mike Huckabee as Ambassador to Israel - suggest that peace in the West Asia is more distant than ever. These choices reflect a growing alignment with Israel’s interests, further inflaming tensions and laying the groundwork for a catastrophic conflict-one that could see a war against Iran as the ultimate culmination of decades of Western intervention.
This looming disaster cannot be divorced from the historical legacy of Western interference in West Asia. Iran’s relationship with the West has been shaped by centuries of betrayal and manipulation. A defining moment in this fraught history was the CIA-backed coup of 1953, which ousted Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh after he sought to nationalise Iran’s oil industry.
This act, orchestrated by Western powers, reinstated the Shah’s brutal regime, sowing the seeds for the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This history of intervention, driven by oil and geopolitics, instilled a deep sense of betrayal in the Iranian consciousness a sentiment that still defines Iran’s foreign policy today.
Divided along sectarian lines and often opportunistic in their foreign policy, Iran’s neighbours have repeatedly failed to put regional unity ahead of external pressures. Yet, the geopolitical manipulations that have shaped this region’s history are part of a broader pattern: the West’s refusal to recognise the sovereignty of nations it deems strategically irrelevant.
The Iranian people have grown ever more resolute in their refusal to capitulate to external demands. This isolation, initially born of necessity, has also transformed into a profound existential struggle.
In response, Iran has sought alliances with nations like China and Russia and forged relationships with non-state actors in the region. These alliances-born not of ideology, but of pragmatic necessity-have allowed Iran to exert regional influence, shifting the balance of power in ways the West never anticipated.
In his first term, Trump used a two-pronged strategy to weaken Iran: connecting other Arab nations in favour of Israel through the Abraham Accords, a treaty engineered by his Jewish-origin son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and secondly, targeting key personalities who enabled Iran’s influence in the region while funding efforts by Iranians living abroad working against Iran.
In his second term, which could be more refined and sharpened by the experiences he earned in the last eight years-both in office and outside the White House-his actions could become far more unpredictable. Consequently, the potential for war against Iran is no longer a distant fear; it is a rapidly approaching reality. It would affirm the West’s view that the lives of Iranians, like those across the Global South, are expendable in pursuit of geopolitical dominance, making this a war of choice, not necessity, with existential stakes for Iran.
In this context, the responsibility to avoid war does not lie solely with the U.S. or Iran, but with all the nations of the region, including those of the Arab world.
Despite their differing beliefs, histories, and alliances, it is incumbent upon Arab nations to take a united stand against the spectre of war. The voices of Arab leaders, particularly those who have long been caught in the geopolitical crossfire of the US-Iran conflict, must rise in defence of regional peace and stability. Divisions must be set aside in favour of collective action that prioritises the preservation of life and sovereignty over ideological differences. The world, and particularly the nations of West Asia, must strive to find a path of diplomacy and dialogue, to avoid yet another destructive war that will further tear apart the very fabric of the region.
(The writer is a journalist and author; Views are personal)
