<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-top-anchor"></div>
<div id="gmail-toolbar" class="gmail-toolbar-container">
<span name="selected"></span>
</div>
<div class="gmail-container" lang="en-US" dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail-header gmail-reader-header gmail-reader-show-element">
<a class="gmail-domain gmail-reader-domain" href="https://www.palestinechronicle.com/this-is-how-we-know-the-iran-war-is-failing-and-not-for-military-reasons/">palestinechronicle.com</a>
<div class="gmail-domain-border"></div><h1 class="gmail-reader-title">This Is How We Know the Iran War Is Failing \u2014 And Not for Military Reasons</h1>March 23, 2026</div>
<hr>
<div class="gmail-content">
<div class="gmail-moz-reader-content gmail-reader-show-element"><div id="gmail-readability-page-1" class="gmail-page"><div>
<img src="https://www.palestinechronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/us_military_iraq_invasion_2003_wiki.png" alt="" title="us_military_iraq_invasion_2003_wiki" class="gmail-moz-reader-block-img" width="408" height="274" style="margin-right: 25px;">
US Marine Corps vehicles deployed in
Iraq during the 2003 invasion under Operation Iraqi Freedom. (Photo:
USMC/Wikimedia Commons)
<p><strong>By <a href="https://www.palestinechronicle.com/writers/ramzy-baroud" title="Display all articles for Ramzy Baroud">Ramzy Baroud</a></strong> </p>
<blockquote>
<h3>Western and Arab allies reject joining the war on Iran not from principle, but from a clear expectation of failure.</h3>
</blockquote>
<p>Speaking on Sunday, March 22, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu called on world leaders to join the US-Israeli military
campaign against Iran, framing Tehran as a global threat.</p>
<p>\u201cIf anyone needed an explanation of why Iran is the enemy of
civilization, and the enemy and the danger to the entire world. You got
it in the last 48 hours,\u201d he said, during a visit to the site of an
Iranian missile strike in the southern city of Arad.</p>
<p>Days earlier, on March 17, US President Donald Trump criticized NATO
allies for refusing to participate in the war, calling their position a
\u201cvery foolish mistake.\u201d He later escalated his criticism, on March 20,
branding them \u201ccowards\u201d for staying out of the fight.</p>
<p>These appeals\u2014and the visible reluctance that followed\u2014tell a far
more revealing story than official statements about restraint or
neutrality.</p>
<p>But don\u2019t believe the hype: if Europe, along with Arab governments,
believed that the US-Israeli war on Iran\u2014launched on February 28\u2014had any
real chance of success, many would have already joined.</p>
<p>This may sound like an overly harsh conclusion, especially as leaders
across Europe and the Middle East insist that \u201cthis is not our war.\u201d
But history tells a very different story. With few exceptions\u2014Spain,
Oman, and a handful of others\u2014Western powers and pro-US Arab regimes
have rarely been guided by principle. Their record is one of calculated
opportunism, shaped by risk, reward, and the likelihood of victory.</p>
<p>To understand their current hesitation, we must rewind.</p>
<p>In 1990-91, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, Washington swiftly assembled
one of the largest military coalitions in modern history. Under the
banner of international law and with explicit UN Security Council
backing, the US framed its intervention as a limited mission: the
liberation of Kuwait.</p>
<p>That framing mattered. European powers, along with key Arab states,
joined eagerly. The war was seen as legitimate, winnable, and
foundational to shaping a new post-Soviet order in the Middle East under
American leadership.</p>
<p>But by 2003, the calculus had shifted. The US invasion of Iraq was no
longer about reversing aggression; it was about regime change, wrapped
in the rhetoric of the \u201cwar on terror.\u201d This time, major European
powers, most notably France and Germany, openly resisted. It was then
that US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld famously dismissed dissenting
allies as \u201cold Europe,\u201d elevating a group of more compliant governments
in Eastern Europe \u2013 the \u201cnew Europe\u201d.</p>
<p>Unable to recreate the legitimacy of 1991, Washington cobbled
together what it called the \u201cCoalition of the Willing\u201d\u2014a loose,
politically constructed alliance that included countries with limited
military contribution but symbolic value. Britain, under Tony Blair,
became the most prominent partner, tying its fate to Washington\u2019s most
controversial war in decades.</p>
<p>Yet even then, reluctance did not equate to principle. Once Iraq was
invaded and its state dismantled, the same international actors\u2014whether
they had supported the war or not\u2014moved quickly to secure their share of
influence. Energy contracts were signed, reconstruction deals
distributed, and foreign governments inserted themselves into the
management of post-invasion Iraq. The spoils of war, it seemed, were far
more attractive than the risks that preceded them.</p>
<p>The war in Afghanistan reflected a similar pattern. After September
11, the US successfully rallied NATO and dozens of partner countries
under the language of counterterrorism and collective defense. At its
peak, the war effort involved troops from over 50 countries. Once again,
allies were willing to commit when the mission appeared \u2018justified\u2019,
coordinated, and likely to yield strategic returns.</p>
<p>The war on Iran, however, offers none of these assurances.</p>
<p>It is the least rational, least defensible, and most dangerous of all recent US-led military ventures in the Middle East.</p>
<p>Unlike Iraq or Libya, Iran is neither isolated nor structurally weak.
It is a large, cohesive state with a population nearing 93 million, a
vast geography, and a domestic military-industrial capacity that allows
it to sustain prolonged confrontation.</p>
<p>Iran has demonstrated the ability to strike targets across the region
and beyond, while maintaining a network of regional allies and
partnerships, along with strong political ties to major global powers
such as China and Russia.</p>
<p>Equally important is the absence of a credible political framework.
There is no UN mandate, no coherent coalition, and no clear endgame.
Instead, what exists is a volatile partnership between an impulsive US
president and an Israeli leadership whose ambitions extend far beyond
Iran itself.</p>
<p>Donald Trump has spent years undermining trust among traditional
allies, destabilizing global economic relationships, and governing
through unpredictability. War, under such leadership, becomes not a
calculated strategy but a dangerous gamble.</p>
<p>For European and Arab governments, the question is no longer whether
Iran should be confronted, but whether Washington can be trusted to
manage the consequences of such a confrontation. Increasingly, the
answer is no.</p>
<p>As for Benjamin Netanyahu, his objectives are neither limited nor
concealed. This is not simply about neutralizing Iran\u2019s capabilities. It
is about reshaping the entire regional order in ways that would
ultimately subordinate even Washington\u2019s closest Arab partners and
challenge the autonomy of regional powers like Türkiye.</p>
<p>Such a vision offers little incentive for participation, even among historically compliant allies.</p>
<p>It is therefore not restraint that explains the current distance of Europe and Arab regimes, but calculation.</p>
<p>Had this war carried the appearance of legitimacy, the promise of
victory, and the prospect of material or political gain, the familiar
coalition would have already taken shape.</p>
<p>If a more predictable US administration\u2014one capable of mobilizing
alliances and cloaking intervention in legal justification\u2014were in
power, the response might well have been different.</p>
<p>But this war offers none of that.</p>
<p>So the illusion must be discarded. Europe is not rejecting war. Arab
governments are not undergoing a moral transformation. They are doing
what they have always done: assessing risk.</p>
<p>And in this case, the conclusion is unmistakable: They are staying
out not because they oppose the war\u2014but because they believe it will
fail.</p>
<div>
<p><br></p>
<p><span><i><span>\u2013 Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist, author and the
Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of eight books. His
latest book, \u2018</span></i><a href="https://www.sevenstories.com/books/4779-before-the-flood?srsltid=AfmBOorgPOepR8fLBeCXLViw_awRDNTNNerbwDJ4V2X5Jza-ajlZ6_bm"><i><span>Before the Flood</span></i></a><i><span>,\u2019
was published by Seven Stories Press. His other books include \u2018Our
Vision for Liberation\u2019, \u2018My Father was a Freedom Fighter\u2019 and \u2018The Last
Earth\u2019. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center
for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is </span></i><a href="http://www.ramzybaroud.net/"><i><span>www.ramzybaroud.net</span></i></a></span></p></div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
<div>
</div>
<div></div>
</div>
<br></div>