BERLIN — As the conflict between the United States and Iran enters its sixth month, concerns are mounting among Washington’s allies over the war’s trajectory and its broader strategic implications. Analysts and officials from several countries express doubts about the ability of the United States to translate its military superiority into lasting geopolitical gains against Iran.
Since the onset of hostilities, Iran has shown resilience under a more hardline government, maintaining control over key strategic points such as the Strait of Hormuz, a vital chokepoint for global energy shipments. Although Tehran’s nuclear and ballistic missile capacities have been degraded, they remain intact, continuing to pose a threat to American interests and regional stability. Iranian missile and drone attacks have disrupted maritime traffic, damaged energy infrastructure, and targeted U.S. military bases throughout the Middle East, resulting in casualties among American service members.
The prolonged conflict has strained U.S. military resources, with shortages reported in critical armaments like Patriot missiles, potentially affecting broader global commitments, including support for Ukraine. This depletion raises questions about the United States’ capacity for sustained military engagements and undermines confidence among NATO and other allies. Moreover, Washington’s diplomatic standing suffers as unpredictable policy shifts sow uncertainty, eroding trust among partners who previously relied on American security guarantees.
European and Middle Eastern allies have voiced frustration over what they perceive as inconsistent and unilateral U.S. behavior. Past incidents, such as President Donald Trump’s threat to purchase Greenland from Denmark and his demands for increased NATO spending, contribute to a growing perception that U.S. commitments are unreliable. Several regional actors are hedging their bets by seeking closer ties with Iran, China, Russia, and Europe, indicating a recalibration of alliances in response to Washington’s faltering credibility.
Experts characterize the ongoing war as a strategic setback, with some describing it as an “embarrassment” for the United States. Robin Niblett, former director of Chatham House, emphasized that even if Iran eventually collapses, the damage to allied trust and the global order may prove irreversible. Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. negotiator, warned that if Iran consolidates control over the Strait of Hormuz, it would represent a decisive strategic defeat, given the strait’s critical role in global commerce.
Complicating matters, the U.S.-Israel relationship has been strained amid differing views on the conflict’s conduct and prospects. Some American officials have criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for presenting overly optimistic expectations about the war’s duration and outcome. Meanwhile, the extended conflict has coincided with a rise in antisemitism linked by some analysts to broader regional tensions, further complicating the alliance.
Diplomatic efforts continue to focus on the governance of the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran seeks dominant control over the northern passage and shared authority over the southern route, potentially allowing it veto power over commercial transit. Oman, which also borders the strait, advocates for voluntary fees for passage, while Iran demands compulsory fees, indicating a fundamental disagreement. Observers note that Iranian negotiators insist on securing a permanent agreement on the strait’s status before entering new discussions with the United States and seek assurances that American military presence will be reduced.
Iran’s approach reflects a strategic calculus aimed at leveraging control of the strait to withdraw concessions and prevent future U.S. attacks, especially as its regional proxies face setbacks elsewhere, including the Yemeni Houthis’ blockade of the Bab el-Mandeb strait critical to Saudi oil exports.
Despite ongoing talks, significant skepticism remains on both sides. Iranian officials doubt that agreements with the Trump administration can be guaranteed, recalling the U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear accord and recent military actions against Tehran. Analysts predict that the near future will likely be marked by cycles of intermittent truces and escalations, shaping a protracted and unresolved conflict.
As Washington grapples with how to conclude or recalibrate its involvement, and Tehran remains unwilting in its demands and mistrustful of U.S. intentions, the prospect of a “forever war” underscores deep uncertainties in the region’s security landscape.