The research was conducted by Fajar Nugraha, Helda Risman, and Fauzia G. Cempaka Timur of Universitas Pertahanan Republik Indonesia in Bogor, West Java, Indonesia. According to the authors, the conflict raises important questions about whether military operations launched by the United States and Israel were guided by clear and achievable political goals.
The findings are particularly relevant as geopolitical tensions in the Middle East continue to affect global security, energy markets, international diplomacy, and economic stability.
A Conflict That Reshaped Regional Security
For years, tensions among Iran, the United States, and Israel were largely characterized by proxy conflicts, cyber operations, covert actions, and strategic competition across the Middle East. The situation escalated dramatically on February 28, 2026, when the United States and Israel launched attacks against strategic targets in Iran.
Iran responded by targeting several American military installations across the Middle East, transforming a long-running shadow conflict into a direct military confrontation.
The researchers argue that this escalation represents a major turning point in regional security dynamics. Beyond military consequences, the conflict has affected international energy supplies, maritime trade routes, and relations among major global powers.
Understanding the War Through Clausewitz
The study relies on qualitative analysis, drawing from academic literature, strategic studies, policy documents, media reports, and military theory. Rather than focusing solely on battlefield developments, the researchers examined whether military actions were aligned with political objectives.
Carl von Clausewitz, one of the most influential military theorists in history, argued that war should serve political purposes. Military operations are considered effective only when they contribute to clearly defined political goals.
The researchers also applied Clausewitz’s concept of the “Center of Gravity,” which refers to the primary source of an opponent’s strength. Successfully identifying and targeting that source is often considered essential for achieving strategic success.
Key Findings
The study identifies several major conclusions regarding the Iran–United States–Israel conflict.
Political Objectives Appeared Unclear
According to the researchers, the United States did not consistently articulate a single political objective throughout the conflict.
Initial justifications focused on Iran’s nuclear program. Later statements emphasized regime change and the weakening of Iran’s military capabilities. These shifting explanations created uncertainty about what victory would actually look like.
The study argues that unclear political goals made it difficult to develop a coherent military strategy and a realistic endgame.
The Conflict Resembled a “War of Choice”
The researchers describe the conflict as a “war of choice,” meaning it was a deliberate political decision rather than an unavoidable military necessity.
They note that public explanations for military intervention changed repeatedly, making it difficult to identify a stable strategic purpose behind the operation.
Iran’s Strength Was Misjudged
Another major finding is that American decision-makers may have misunderstood the true sources of Iranian resilience.
The study argues that Iran’s strength extends beyond military infrastructure and political leadership. National identity, ideological cohesion, social unity, and regional influence also contribute significantly to the country’s ability to withstand external pressure.
As a result, military actions targeting leadership figures and strategic facilities did not necessarily produce the broader political outcomes expected by their planners.
The Strait of Hormuz Became a Strategic Center of Gravity
One of the most significant conclusions concerns the strategic role of the Strait of Hormuz.
The waterway is one of the world's most important energy corridors, carrying a substantial share of global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments. The study suggests that Iran successfully leveraged its geographic position to exert economic and political pressure on its adversaries.
Even limited disruptions to shipping routes created uncertainty in global energy markets and highlighted the vulnerability of the international economy to regional instability.
Uncertainty Prolonged the Conflict
The researchers also emphasize Clausewitz’s concept of the “fog of war,” which describes the uncertainty that surrounds military decision-making.
In the Iran–US–Israel conflict, incomplete information, shifting objectives, and misinterpretation of opponents’ intentions contributed to repeated escalation. Each side responded to perceived threats with additional military actions, creating a cycle that became increasingly difficult to control.
Implications for Policymakers and Global Security
The study offers broader lessons for governments, military planners, and international organizations.
According to the authors, military superiority alone does not guarantee strategic success. Clear political objectives remain essential for determining when and how a conflict should end.
The findings also highlight the growing importance of economic infrastructure and energy supply networks in modern warfare. Strategic locations such as the Strait of Hormuz can influence global markets as effectively as traditional military operations.
The researchers argue that future conflicts are likely to involve a combination of military, economic, diplomatic, and informational dimensions. Policymakers who fail to recognize these interconnected factors may struggle to achieve lasting outcomes.
As the authors from Universitas Pertahanan Republik Indonesia explain, military operations become increasingly difficult to justify or conclude when political objectives remain ambiguous and constantly evolving.
Author Profiles
Fajar Nugraha is a researcher at Universitas Pertahanan Republik Indonesia specializing in defense studies, military strategy, international security, and geopolitical affairs.
Helda Risman is an academic at Universitas Pertahanan Republik Indonesia whose expertise includes international relations, regional security, and strategic studies.
Fauzia G. Cempaka Timur is a researcher at Universitas Pertahanan Republik Indonesia focusing on defense policy, conflict analysis, and contemporary security issues.
Source
Article Title: War and Political Goals: An Analysis of the Iran-United States Conflict 2026
Authors: Fajar Nugraha, Helda Risman, Fauzia G. Cempaka Timur
Journal: Formosa Journal of Multidisciplinary Research (FJMR)
Year: 2026
Volume and Issue: Vol. 5 No. 6, pp. 1619–1628
Affiliation: Universitas Pertahanan Republik Indonesia (Unhan RI), Bogor, West Java, Indonesia
0 Komentar