As the dust settles on the 110-day military campaign that transformed the Middle Eastern landscape, a critical examination of the conflict’s aftermath has emerged from a seasoned security perspective. In a comprehensive new analysis, General Tukur Buratai, former Chief of Army Staff,dissects the strategic outcomes of the 2026 war between the US-Israel coalition and Iran, challenging conventional narratives regarding the efficacy of military force in the modern era.
In his latest piece, “The 2026 US-Israel-Iran War: A Strategic Reckoning and the Birth of a New Middle Eastern Order,” Buratai argues that the conflict serves as a watershed moment for 21st-century geopolitics.
Introduction
The 110-day US-Israel military campaign against Iran, culminating in the June 2026 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), represents one of the most consequential geopolitical events of the 21st century. What began as a calculated attempt to dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and weaken its regional influence ended as a profound strategic miscalculation that fundamentally altered the balance of power in the Middle East. The conflict exposed the limitations of conventional military supremacy against an ideologically driven, asymmetrically capable adversary, while simultaneously shattering the post-Cold War security architecture that had governed Gulf-American relations for decades. This essay examines the war’s trajectory—from its planning and execution to its far-reaching consequences—and distills the critical lessons for all stakeholders, from the belligerents to the Gulf states and the broader international community.
Background: The Seeds of Confrontation
The path to war was paved by decades of accumulated tensions. Iran’s nuclear program, combined with its revolutionary ideology and extensive network of regional proxies (Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Iraqi militias), had long been deemed unacceptable by the United States and Israel. The Trump administration, viewing the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action as insufficient, pursued a “maximum pressure” campaign of sanctions that crippled Iran’s economy but failed to alter its strategic calculus. Meanwhile, Iran’s ballistic missile program and drone capabilities matured, providing Tehran with an asymmetrical “equalizer” against superior conventional forces.
The February 28, 2026, joint US-Israeli strikes did not emerge from a vacuum. For months, intelligence reports had indicated Iran’s proximity to a nuclear breakout capability. The Israeli government, viewing a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat, had long advocated for preventive military action. As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared on the day of the strikes: “Israel has a sacred duty to remove this existential threat from our doorstep.”⁶ The American calculus, however, was more complex: regime change in Tehran was a stated objective, but Washington also sought to reassert its regional credibility and deter future challenges from both state and non-state actors.
Planning and Preparations
The military planning for the joint campaign reflected a fundamental confidence in conventional superiority. US and Israeli strategists assembled a formidable force package: over fifty manoeuvre battalions, advanced air assets, naval strike groups, and sophisticated cyber warfare capabilities. The operational concept was straightforward—decapitate Iran’s nuclear infrastructure through precision strikes, degrade its air defense systems, and create conditions for internal regime collapse. The United States designated its participation as Operation Epic Fury, while Israel codified its involvement as Operation Roaring Lion (also referred to as Lion’s Roar).³⁻⁵
