U.S.-Iran relations have entered a highly dangerous period. What used to be a cold ideological rivalry between the two countries has now broken out into the open on February 28, 2026, with a US/Israeli bombing campaign against several Iranian sites. What used to be an ideological disagreement about the future of the Middle East has now erupted into a security crisis that has the potential of getting far out of control, unless all parties are urgently directed to the negotiating table.
For Washington, the primary purpose of the attack was to curb and limit Iran’s ability to exercise its strategic options, while at the same time making the international community pay a price for what it considers to be Iran’s destabilising activities, primarily its nuclear programme. For Iran, the bombing scared the wits out of its citizens, frightening them at the prospect of foreign intervention in the country’s affairs and empowering the conservatives who hold the view that the Islamic Republic must take a more belligerent attitude towards the West to defend itself and its vital interests. Now, over a year after the 16 February 2026 joint air strike, the attack is seen as a purely defensive act by both Washington and Tehran – in Washington, it was an act necessary to contain and curb Iranian actions, while in Tehran, it was necessary to prevent any Iranian reprisals against American soldiers stationed in Iraq and the states of the Gulf. The air strike has thus ensured the continuation of the cycle of mutual hostility between the two countries, which have yet to find a way to bring this hostility to an end.
The US vs Iran is an unpleasant surprise for us all. As we know, diplomacy is the only tool in today’s increasingly fragmented and multipolar world. The use of force rarely provides an answer to the underlying causes of the disputes between states. And what about the longest-standing US vs Iran rivalry? – a competition for influence in the Middle East in political, economic and military terms, and beyond. As long as no attempt is made to address through diplomacy the competing claims of the two countries, the negative feelings towards each other will remain, and could cause another military incident at any moment. So we need to turn this latest conflict between the US and Iran into an opportunity for diplomacy – before it is too late and it spirals out of control.
The risk of all-out war is high. Iran could retaliate with precision-guided missiles to US military installations in the region, as well as to American allies, through its vast network of allies and proxies. While such attacks would not necessarily lead to a second world war, they could lead to a cycle of attacks and counter-attacks that could destabilise the entire region.
The crisis has an economic and geopolitical dimension that extends far beyond the military dimension. The Persian Gulf is one of the most important routes for oil transport. A disruption to this route is likely to affect oil prices and global trade. Thus, the effects of the US-Iran conflict are likely to be felt far beyond the Middle East.
Stopping a war between Israel and Iran is possible only through diplomacy. Despite the occasional artillery bombardment, both parties are able to communicate their positions and even discuss possible areas of future cooperation. The communication channels that are used to facilitate either direct talks or behind-the-scenes diplomacy need to be revitalised in order to prevent escalation and to make sure that both sides feel that their core security needs have been met. The possible agreements on the Iranian nuclear program could serve as a bridge for the resumption of direct negotiations between the two.
Multilateralism will be the key to any diplomatic effort. European governments and international organisations have to intervene, providing a forum for negotiations, as well as offering incentives and penalties in the event of an agreement. Washington and Tehran cannot be the only actors in what could be a highly charged and historic negotiation on the Middle East’s future.
While one can advocate for diplomacy accompanied by a credible deterrence option, one has to take into account the costs of an unending escalation. For the United States and its allies, it is necessary to maintain their defensive systems in order to negotiate from a position of strength, and for Iran, it will be necessary to deter the West by demonstrating its capability to absorb a hit while at the same time indicating a willingness to make concessions. The aim is to avert war in February 2026.
It’s very clear to me that history is a great teacher, and what we learn in history is that no matter the level of tension or competition, it’s always important to maintain diplomatic relationships. Whether it’s the height of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union or times of relative stability or extreme conflict, there were always channels of communication that were maintained by Cold War adversaries to prevent major crises from erupting into all-out war. And what we learn from that is that diplomacy is not a matter of trust; it’s a mechanism to reduce the risk of war and the level of tension between even the most opposing of nations.
This February 2026 will be a pivotal moment in the history of international relations and one of the most enduring rivalries in modern geopolitics. A miscalculation in this standoff could lead to missiles being launched and all-out war and retaliation, which could further destabilise an already volatile Middle East and have severe economic consequences worldwide. Alternatively, the current diplomatic process may yet succeed in averting an all-out war and its aftermath, with the standoff simply entering a phase of détente and a hiatus in the ongoing negotiations, and the situation gradually returning to normal.
The reason that US-Iran tensions are going to continue is that the standoff is quite complex, and the use of military force is a precarious tool. Force may change the strategic facts in dispute, but it cannot replace diplomacy as the means of settling disputes. The challenge to US policymakers will be to ensure that diplomacy is brought to the forefront of policy and that the US and Iran act in such a way as to prevent this conflict from getting out of hand. Perhaps by a combination of diplomacy and self-restraint, the conflict may yet be resolved in a way that is truly stable.
Views: 66
Simon Hutagalung
Simon Hutagalung is a retired Indonesian Foreign Ministry diplomat and received his Master’s degree in Political Science and Comparative Politics from the City University of New York. He writes opinion pieces for Europeantimes and all opinions expressed in his article are his own.
