(Col (Dr) Shantonu Roy)
Introduction
The US – Israel – Iran war has been seen in the light of military and political fallouts for the Islamic Republic of Iran, and from holistic legal and geopolitical viewpoints. Iran has stood up to US-Israeli attacks more than anticipated. Trump had thought that killing Khamenei would make Iran fall like a pack of cards.The IRGC command has stood up, especially the disruption of international trade by Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz. It is said that the attack by Trump is illegal under US law, which the Trump administration has put aside, citing the precedence of unauthorized military actions by his predecessors. International criminal law, has said the attacks as a crime of aggression – a war of aggression. Many analysts identifythe US-Israeli attack with an inkling of expansionism and imperialism by Trump, away from the values of the liberal international order.
Iranian response compared to the Twelve-Day War points to a change in Iran’s command structure. The war showed Iran’s weapon is neither its missile program nor its nuclear program, but the Strait of Hormuz, which quickly put pressure on the world economy.US trying to prevent Iran from developing a weapon of mass destruction, it gave Iran a weapon of mass disruption” by the military control over the Strait of Hormuz. It is compared the closure of the Strait to the Suez Crisis, causing a strategic failure for the US. Three aircraft carrier groups are fighting the war with damages to them.
The Unauthorized War
Legal and military experts say that US actions in Iran require congressional authorization. Theuse of the word “war” by Trump in his communications about the strikes, is not correct as the Trump administration had bypassed congressional war powers. Rubio says that the Trump administration had implemented the War Powers Resolution, but is it legally binding. Many American presidents and administrations have carried out attacks and invasions on countries without congressional approval but in that case only America was involved, but here it involves world economy and a complete region.Analysts have argued that Trump’s actions in Iran can be differentiated from prior non-authorized uses of force because the “speculative pre-emptive” justification for this war is comparatively weak when measured against past domestic and international legal rationales.The defense argued here is that the U.S. strikes on Iran were justified as it was done “in the collective self-defense of Israel, as well for the United States’ own inherent right of self-defense,” giving out that the military campaign was not a new war but the extension of the ongoing conflict which is an outcome of “Iran’s malign aggression over decades” since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. This includes the Iranian attacks on Israel in April and October 2024, Iranian proxy warfare against the U.S. and Israel, and Iran’s nuclear program.In the ongoing war, on 13 March, the US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth stated “… no quarter, no mercy for our enemies”. Then, on 5 April, Trump repeatedly threatened to bomb all of Iran’s bridges and power plants if it did not agree to a deal to end the war. The combined US–Israeli attacks on Iran are illegal under international law, as they do not follow the UN Charter’s prohibition on the use of force, because the attacks do not meet the criteria for self-defense and have no authorization from the United Nations Security Council. There is no recognized legal framework for preventive war or any clause for forcible regime change. The attacks have been, therefore, considered a war of aggression, which is the ultimate war crime.U.S. President Trump had threatened to destroy all the bridges and power plants in Iran and said the country will be brought “back to the Stone Ages, where they belong,” if it does not agree to a deal to end the war or reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Can, Trump say such derogatory statements about another nation on wiping it from the face of the world.Then, is the war in line, just to assert supremacy in the area.
The Strait of Hormuz
Access to the Strait of Hormuz, which carries nearly a quarter of global oil flows, is contested between Iran and the US. The strait has been blocked since March 2, after U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran. Although Tehran declared the strait open on April 17, the IRGC announced it shut just one day later. The US has since moved to enforce its supremacy in the strait. It seized an Iranian-flagged cargo vessel on April 19. Vessel tracking and maritime trade data show the decrease in movement of ships and the cause for downward trend in the world economy.Daily movements in the strait remain well below pre-conflict levels. Few vessels operate “dark,” with AIS transponders switched off and therefore not visible in the data, commercial traffic through the strait blind to radars.Of the 187 vessels that have successfully transited the strait since March 4, over half are operated by shipping companies located in just four countries. China’s position at the top of that list is because of its proximity to Teheran and China’s assistance to Iran in the conflict, though secretly.
Commercial shipping transiting through Hormuz is increasingly subject to Iranian requirements. Reporting suggests that some vessels are coordinating through designated intermediaries, sharing detailed voyage information, and in some cases paying additional fees as toll to transit. Ships are presently moving along preapproved routes nearer to Iranian waters. Since March 15, most observed transits have followed these patterns.Most of the trade (by value) moving through Hormuz is for a few countries only. Gulf exporters depend on Hormuz to move the bulk of their output, while major Asian economies rely on it for energy imports. Many of the most exposed countries are key U.S. security partners, as they are not in the good books of Iran. This conflict is increasing prices for commodities tied to Gulf exports. Crude oil and fertilizer prices have risen sharply, reflecting the region’s central role in global supply chains. Grain, has not had any price spikes. Sustained increases in energy and fertilizer prices will affect world food prices. Higher energy costs are already affecting food prices in some markets.
Since the crisis began, natural gas prices in Europe and Asia have gone up, reflecting their exposure to the ongoing disruption of maritime trade in the Persian Gulf. The United States, however, hasenough domestic production, keeping prices in control and keeping it at a better standing than Europe.The Strait of Hormuz carries a smaller share of total seaborne trade than many other major chokepoints, but it remains a strategic passage for global energy flows. Traffic moving into and out of the Persian Gulf cannot easily reroute when disruptions occur, leaving hundreds of ships and lots of dollars in goods stranded since the conflict began. The ongoing disruption underscores the importance of keeping critical maritime trade routes open and secure.
The Command of IRGC
When Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ruled Iran as the ultimate, he exerted full control over all decisions about war, peace and negotiations with the United States. His son and successor is not at that negotiating level because of his lesser aura.
Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, the son, is a head without power who is yet to be seen or heard since his appointment in March. Instead, a well-choreographed set of commanders in the IRGC and their followers are the key leaders for matters of diplomacy, security, and war.The injuries to him have been a matter of concernand the sheer challenge of reaching him has resulted in Mr. Khamenei’s delegating decision making to the generals. Reformist factions, as well as ultra-hard-liners, are still involved in political discussions and that Mr. Khamenei’s closeness to the generals, with whom he fought the Iran-Iraq war as a teenager, have made him the leader.
President Trump like a maverick has stated that the killing of all the top leaders have created a regime change, but then why the WAR. In reality, the Islamic republic has not been toppled, it has integrated with national feelings to fight USA with more fervor. Power is now in the hands of an entrenched, hard-line military, and the broad influence of the clerics is waning. Those who do not want to give up the new found power.
Iran’s Missile Arsenal
Iran possesses the Middle East’s largest and most diverse ballistic missile arsenal, featuring thousands of missiles of various ranges designed for strategic deterrence and regional reach, with some capable of reaching distances of 2,000–3,000 km.
Key assets include solid-fuel missiles (e.g., Sejjil, Kheibar Shekan) for rapid launch and liquid-fuel systems (e.g., Shahab-3, Khorramshahr).
Key Components of Iran’s Missile ArsenalMedium-Range Ballistic Missiles (MRBMs): These include the Khorramshahr-1, -2, and -4 (2,000–3,000 km range) and the Sejjil (2,000 km range), capable of striking targets across the Middle East.
Short-Range Ballistic Missiles (SRBMs): Includes the Shahab-1/2, Qiam-1, and Fateh-110 series, used for tactical, precision strikes.Solid-Fuel and Advanced Missiles: The Kheibar Shekan (1,700+ km range) is designed to evade air defense systems, while the Fattah is described as a hypersonic weapon.
Cruise Missiles & Space Launch Vehicles (SLVs): Iran uses Soumar cruise missiles and has developed SLVs like Simorgh and Ghaem-100, which have inherent, long-range capabilities.
Strategic CapabilitiesTargeting: The arsenal is geared towards attacking regional, US-operated, and adversary airbases with high-precision, high-speed projectiles.
Deployment: Many missiles are housed underground, hardened missile cities and utilize mobile launchers to reduce vulnerability to preemptive strikes.
Capacity: US intelligence has historically cited thousands of missiles in inventory, with continued, significant capabilities maintained despite regional conflicts and sanctions.
US officials indicate Iran has been “digging out” and repositioning its remaining hidden missile assets and launchers following previous degradation, attempting to maintain its long-term deterrent.The IRGC continues to prioritize its missile program as its primary strategic weapon system and not to forget the kilograms of enriched Uranium.
Conclusion
It is difficult to tell which side is winning in the war, because the goals are continuously changing. The cost of war for USA is not in its weapons fired, but in its image and the crashing of the world economy and share market.
Trump has multiple goals for the United States, some quite short while the others being far-fetched. These are ending Iran’s nuclear program, downgrading its missile capabilities and conventional military stocks, stopping Tehran’s support for Hezbollah, Hamas, and other proxy forces, and, most ambitiously, regime change in Tehran. To achieve these goals, the United States and Israel have eliminated the top Iranian hierarchy and bombed major infrastructures.
Iran, on its part, seeks to keep the nation alive and, if it can, restore its differences with the United States and Israel. It has also spent a fortune on its nuclear program and has a strategic as well as ideological commitment towards its citizens. Iran, if it can survives the bombing, it can achieve many of these goals of sustaining the US onslaught. To increase pressure on the United States in particular, Iran has bombed U.S. allies in the Gulf and stopped traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
The effects of these strikes are real, but fall short of achieving the more ambitious U.S. goals. Iran, military power to reckon before the war, is depleted. It can rebuild its missile and other weapons programs—Iran has enough human capital to resume work after the war ends—but this will take time and money. In addition, because Iran now lacks viable air defenses and has hardly any Navy, Israel will attack Iranian facilities at willin case of a ceasefire.
Iran’s nuclear program has gone retrograde, but it is not of any consequence because they have the will. Although the United States has bombed nuclear sites as part of Operation Epic Fury, U.S. and Israeli operations against Iran’s nuclear program in 2025 had already given it a reverse.
Regime has not happened. The clerical regime quelled mass protests, killing thousands, and despite the deaths of many senior leaders, the regime has the authority. Iran proxies, like its nuclear program, had been hit hard before the war, especially Hezbollah. Both Hezbollah and the Houthis have attacked Israel, but the impact of these attacks has been depleted, and Israel has further devastated Hezbollah.
Despite their back being to the wall, Tehran has put the noose for the United States and its allies. Iran’s attacks on U.S. Gulf allies have killed dozens of people, destroyed major industrial and energy sites, and hurt their image and their faith in the USA. But these attacks will decrease Iran’s influence in the region. The Gulf states are angry at Tehran, and they will closer to the United States and Israel as a result, but cautiously.
Though, Iran has closed off traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, leading to hike in oil and gas prices as well as essential items like fertilizers and other items. Now, with Iran calling out to damage underwater internet cables in the Persian Gulf, thus threatening to cut of Gulf communication. Also, Russia having openly supported Iran and China covertly giving information and maybe weapons, it has to be seen “Whose war is it”.