The attack on a ship of Iranian interests in the Caspian Sea by the Ukrainians was correctly read as a “trend of merging” the two wars, in Ukraine and Iran. However, it will be about the formalization of an existing relationship. However, if this situation becomes permanent, it will have two possible consequences. Either the approach to a large overall agreement of the powerful, or the approach to the brink of disaster. And at a rapid pace.
The relationship between the two war fronts mainly concerned the apparent reduction in the rate of supply of Kiev with weapons and ammunition, a development that favored Russia. The West’s attention was diverted from the Ukrainian front, a war that disappeared from the front pages of the world news, as the exchange of blows between Israel and Iran and the choice of geographical expansion of the conflict area by Tehran created an explosive situation in the global energy market and destabilized the entire Middle East.
The war in Ukraine, although it had equally negative consequences in terms of European and global security, had begun to be fatalistically integrated as a new reality in everyday life, after four years of conflict. Moreover, the argument of the need to become independent from Russian hydrocarbons, as Moscow was using them as a tool to “regulate” European politics, at least, sometimes resorting to coercion, had been digested by the political leaderships and societies of Western countries.
Although it is extremely premature to definitively judge whether there will be a “merger” of the two fronts, the question can be explored. On the one hand, at the level of a plausible scenario and on the other hand, on the basis of Iran’s commitment to retaliation, through the Foreign Ministry’s position. Therefore, the discussion that has been opened lends itself to “mapping” potential scenarios.
What would be the goals of a… merger of war fronts?
The main scenario that is being worked on concerns the potential logic behind the Ukrainian attack on the Iranian ship.
- So, does Ukraine seek to re-enter Western priorities by seeking to unify the two fronts into a single geostrategic canvas?
- Because it fell victim to the withdrawal of Western interest after the outbreak of the war in Iran?
- Because with the successes achieved by many drone raids, at least at a tactical level, does it feel that it is now exerting serious pressure on Russia?
So, according to this argument, there is a positive situation that it can successfully “sell” to Western leaderships and societies for the benefit of both Ukraine and its own personal-political interests.
The negative in this case, the main consequence would be that we would be led to a war… of all against all! The “merger” of the fronts would legitimize the existing cooperation between Moscow and Tehran on both fronts. However, it would also legitimize, in retrospect, the alleged involvement of the Russians in the war in Iran, by providing assistance to the Iranians for strikes with suicide drones on American bases in the Gulf! This is what the American CIA is investigating.
However, the main problem is not this. Until now, we may have all known as a “common secret” that others were the real belligerents on the Ukrainian front. Now, Washington’s participation on both fronts will be formalized, regardless of Trump’s initial positions, with the result that the USA and Russia will find themselves as adversaries, and even on terms worse than those of the Cold War. Because at that time there was, informally, a tacit understanding of certain boundaries on both sides, which also maintained peace.
Who would benefit from an uncontrolled escalation?
Now, whatever modern societies see seems normal, of course with the full support of an increasingly controlled information system, which marginalizes any voice that attempts to sound the alarm about the possibility of uncontrolled escalation.
This would be a development that would benefit the Ukrainian leadership, which is under heavy pressure from within and beyond. Kiev’s involvement in the war against Iran would help it join the same American umbrella of protection as Israel! Theoretically speaking, always. However, the development would also be welcome for the Iranian theocratic regime, but for other reasons!
Just as Zelensky flirts with the attempt to unify the two fronts to reverse the negative consequences (e.g. reduced flow of war materiel) of the outbreak of conflicts in the Middle East, the mullahs will also benefit from at least a balanced focus on both conflicts, due to the distraction of their opponent, with given means. But would this maximize the pressures for involvement in the conflicts of European states? At least within the framework of NATO.
The “merger” of the two war fronts, however, would also make the conflict officially resemble a world war. So far, the effects of the individual fronts have been clearly global, while the new distribution of planetary power has been pointed out by most analysts as the genesis of the conflicts.
However, the formalization of such a massive geographical expansion of the conflicts would create the conditions for further expansion to other points of top geostrategic importance, such as the eastern Mediterranean. However, a strong possibility is also the expansion of the conflicts to the Caspian region, which, although it would turn the attention of Iranian forces in another direction, would lead to cooperation between Russians and Iranians to address the challenge in the common geopolitical neighborhood…
This is what could also lead to NATO involvement. Therefore, the development has every reason to worry us. In essence, we will be led to the formalization of the earth and fire, at a time when the adequacy of military equipment in Western arsenals is on the agenda.
In such a case, Washington’s covert participation in the Ukraine war, until recently – and always to a certain extent – will no longer be a viable option. And the second possibility of an agreement between the powerful will resemble a midsummer night’s dream…
