World Review: The Iran War, When Does it End? What's the Global Impact? Israel’s Many Wars

A synopsis of this week's edition of World Review

Each week, I host a video podcast called World Review with Ivo Daalder where journalists from major news outlets around the world join me to discuss the latest global news stories of the week.

World Review can now be heard on Sundays, at 7:00 a.m. Central Time, on Chicago’s NPR station, WBEZ, or on the WBEZ app. We’ll still tape the show on Fridays, and post the video on YouTube and the audio version on Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.

“World Review is always fascinating. I love the fact that you can get journalists from around the world to participate since zoom is the medium.”

— A Subscriber to America Abroad

Now, on to this week’s show. We discussed the war in Iran, how it ends, its global impacts, and Israel’s many wars. Joining me this week were Carla Robbins, Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, Susan Glasser, Staff Writer at the New Yorker, and Steven Erlanger, the Chief Diplomatic Correspondent for Europe for the New York Times.

While I encourage you to watch or listen to the episode (and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts!), here are a few interesting things I took away from our discussion:

• “Tell me how this ends.” That was the question then Brigadier-General David Petraeus asked of a journalists shortly after the start of the Iraq War in 2003. As the War in Iran continues to rage, the question is even more apt. Susan argued that the difference this time is a President who feels unencumbered by the need to let the American people know what’s happening. President Trump is going to claim success no matter what happens. As he recently said, “we’ve won but we’re not done yet.” Carla pointed out that the war is costing an extraordinary amount of money. The Department of Defense has clear “red lines” of how low their stockpiles of critical munitions can go, but it’s not revealing where the red lines are. Even more worrisome is the likelihood that the war may leave U.S. unable to deal with new threats in other, potentially more vital regions. “What if Putin decided to invade a Baltic country right now?” Steve pointed out that the U.S. approach to allies and the international community is also entirely different from 2003. In 2003, the Bush Administration made the case to allies and the United Nations. Trump doesn’t care about what allies think. He didn’t consult them and it’s not even clear he told them before the war started.

• As the war drags on, the global impact of the war continue to reverberate. Carla pointed out that allies are feeling the impact of the war. European energy prices are skyrocketing, and the Gulf States may not like the chaos that Trump leaves behind. Susan argued that the U.S. war in Iran is costing billions while putting billions more in Russia’s pocket to fight in Ukraine. Did the U.S. have a plan for dealing with the closure of the Straight of Hormuz? Is the American military actually ready for this new age of drone warfare? Trump rejected Zelensky’s offer for help, but now the U.S. military is rapidly trying to integrate Ukrainian technology and expertise. Steven maintained that the European reaction is less divided as is often portrayed. Their overriding aim is not to participate in this war, because they’ believe it is illegal and a big strategic mistake. Ukraine is the priority for Europe. This is not the “supine Europe” that we’re led to believe exists; they realize that they will bear more of the consequences than Americans will.

• The continuation of the war by Israel is happening within a context of many ongoing wars. Israel is conducting airstrikes in Iran while also engaging in an escalating campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel also has an unfinished conflict in Gaza and continues to supported expanded settlements in the West Bank. Steven argued that Bibi Netanyahu brought the United States into this war. Netanyahu has talked a lot about the Iranian nuclear program and more recently the ballistic missile program, which is a threat to Israel but not the United States. Since October 7, 2003, Netanyahu has also been very effective as Prime Minister, reestablishing deterrence, destroying Hezbollah and Hamas, and putting the Iranians on the back foot. Israel is ascendent throughout the Middle East and the Iranian security apparatus is in shambles. This war will create effects across the Middle East similar to how the collapse of the Soviet Union changed Europe. Carla argued that even a shattered Iran could be extremely dangerous, particularly one sitting on a pile of nuclear material. Will Israel be comfortable with a totally unstable Iran? Susan pointed out that the political calendar for Israel matters. Netanyahu is the longest serving PM in Israeli history, this strengthens his hand in elections and distracts from the unfinished war in Gaza. Israel has been able to really penetrate Iranian society, but can it turn that tactical brilliance into strategic success? Israeli and US leadership are telling their public the war is about Iranian strength, but they’re telling themselves it’s about Iranian weakness. There is hubris in thinking tactical and technological prowess can create political change.

Those are my quick takes on this week’s episode here on World Review. To get the full story, please listen to the episode itself.