A sigh of relief has spread across the world with the announcement by US President Donald Trump on Monday that the war imposed on the Islamic Republic of Iran by the United States and Israel had ended after 106 days, and Iran confirming it. As per the current understanding, both sides will sign an agreement in Switzerland on Friday outlining the terms of a 60-day ceasefire. However, given Trump’s history of changing positions and his inconsistent commitments, there is no guarantee that he will not reverse course or violate the promises made. The country for whose interests the United States had taken up the war, i.e. Israel has not only refused to accept the agreement but has also strongly opposed one of its key provisions of ending attacks on Lebanon. Even so, the most consoling development is that the blockade on maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which has severely affected the lives of people in countries across the East and West, is expected to come to an end. The key provisions of the agreement include reopening the Strait of Hormuz once the deal is signed and ending the US naval blockade against Iran. While Trump has said that shipping through the strait would be completely free of charges, Iran has not indicated that it is abandoning its decision to impose maritime fees.
Although the US and Israel had declared that the primary objective of their military action was to completely halt Iran’s nuclear programme, a decision on the issue is now expected to be reached within the 60-day ceasefire period. If an agreement is not reached, there appears to be no immediate threat of renewed war; instead the ceasefire period is to be extended and negotiations are to continue. The issue of what should be done with Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium is also subject to negotiation. The agreement also provides for the gradual removal of sanctions imposed on Iran and the release of Iranian assets frozen in foreign banks. If one thinks of what Israel and the United States actually achieved from this war, which many view as lacking justification or a clear rationale, the straightforward answer would be an outright zero. The US and Israel had projected that they would cripple Iran’s economic resources and military capabilities within days, eliminate its leadership, and install a new puppet government in Tehran with the support of a section of the Iranian population. Given Iran’s severe economic difficulties caused by sanctions, including soaring inflation, a record decline in the value of its currency, and isolation from many countries, there had been widespread doubts about its ability to defend itself, especially with what was considered an outdated weapons arsenal. These factors have encouraged the Yankee-Zionist alliance to believe that its military campaign could achieve quick results.
The US-Israel offensive began with a brutal attack, including the bombing of a school attended by around 200 children, resulting in the deaths of young students. This strengthened their confidence that their objectives could be achieved within a short period. However, three months thence, a reality that has become apparent to people in the United States and across the world is that Iran possesses the resilience not only to withstand pressure but also to force its adversaries to reconsider their positions. Iran has succeeded in gaining the sympathy of not only European countries that are close allies of the US and Israel, but also a majority of nations around the world. Major global powers, including Russia and China, openly stood in support of Iran. Iran had earlier assured that it would not develop nuclear weapons. However, it has continued to maintain that, like other countries, it has the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, particularly as an energy source. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has often claimed that India maintains close relations with the United States, Israel and Iran simultaneously. However, apart from welcoming the current ceasefire agreement, India was unable to play any role in the peace efforts that led to the agreement. Despite disruptions in the availability of oil and natural gas supplies causing serious impacts on national life and worsening inflation, the Indian government could only watch the developments unfold. At the same time, Pakistan took advantage of the situation by stepping into a mediatory role and gaining credit for helping move the process forward to the point where the parties signed a ceasefire agreement. While the main Opposition has criticised this as a major diplomatic failure of the Modi government, those responsible have not been able to provide a convincing explanation. It cannot be denied that the underlying reason behind India’s national leadership aligning itself so closely with Benjamin Netanyahu, a leader who is not even certain to be re-elected as Prime Minister in the next election, remains unclear and raises questions.