Hua Junxiong's Perspective: U.S.-Iran War Accelerates U.S. Hegemony Decline, Reshapes Middle East Geopolitical Landscape

On February 28, 2026, the Trump administration launched a war against Iran, dubbed 'Operation Epic Fury.' The purpose of the war was to advance the 'New Middle East Strategy,' overthrow the Iranian regime, eliminate nuclear facilities, and control strategic passages and energy supplies in the Middle East. However, due to serious strategic misjudgments, inadequate preparation, lack of coordination, and logistical shortages, the course of the war completely deviated from U.S. expectations. Iran, leveraging the unity of its highest leadership, including its spiritual leader and the assassination of Khamenei, and the resolve of its people, has successfully thwarted U.S. attempts at regime change. Iran's asymmetric warfare capabilities have effectively repelled U.S. military offensives, prevented the complete destruction of its nuclear facilities, and effectively controlled the Strait of Hormuz, not only shattering America's dream of controlling Middle Eastern strategic passages but also escalating regional conflicts into a global economic crisis, thereby limiting U.S. military offensives. The war has dragged on for five months, with no end in sight, potentially plunging the U.S. into another 'Forever War' like Afghanistan and Iraq, completely shattering Trump's campaign promise of 'never engaging in permanent wars.' This war has plunged the U.S. into multiple dilemmas—military, political, economic, and diplomatic—and may become a critical turning point in the evolution of global geopolitical dynamics, with experts already viewing it as a symbolic event marking the accelerated collapse of U.S. unilateral hegemony. The Middle East region is breaking away from the control of a single hegemony, and a new geopolitical order of multi-centrism and pluralism is gradually emerging. The U.S. decision-makers, based on the assassination of Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei's top military and policy advisor, General Qasem Soleimani, in January 2020, and the U.S. 'Midnight Hammer Operation' in June 2025, which bombed the Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities, formed an erroneous strategic judgment that the Iranian regime would collapse quickly after Khamenei's assassination, and even if retaliatory actions were taken, they would be limited and symbolic. However, the U.S. completely ignored Iran's survival crisis awareness and the defense system constructed over decades, as well as the people's resolve to resist, and had no recognition of Iran's asymmetric warfare capabilities and the regional alliance system. Ultimately, after the war broke out, the intensity and scope of Iran's counterattacks completely exceeded U.S. control. The war is about to enter its sixth month, and the battlefield shows distinct contradictory characteristics: the U.S. military, relying on advanced equipment, has achieved partial tactical victories, but all strategic goals have failed, and it is stuck in a stalemate. Iran, far from collapsing, has become stronger and stronger, seized the initiative in the conflict, and dragged the war into a long-term war of attrition favorable to itself. In contrast, the U.S. has fallen into an insoluble dilemma: military force depletion, ammunition shortages, and difficult replenishment. Trump has repeatedly threatened to escalate strikes and expand the war, but most of these threats, faced with reality, have ended up as empty slogans, with diminishing deterrence. The so-called military superiority is being gradually eroded in the endless war of attrition. People finally see that although the U.S. has overwhelming military strength, it has long lost the will to sustain combat, a clear strategy, and strong resolve. The U.S. military can carry out precise strikes and destroy at will, but it cannot completely conquer a stubborn sovereign state. Force can destroy land, but it can never subdue people's hearts. The most notable aspect of this war is that it quickly exposed the limits of U.S. firepower. The world's strongest military force not only cannot manipulate Iran at will but has itself become mired in a quagmire, unable to advance or retreat, ultimately becoming a prison that traps itself. To reverse the situation, the U.S. has increased its troops in the Middle East by more than 10,000, with the total number of regional troops exceeding 50,000, but it still cannot break the stalemate. Military experts generally believe that Iran has 1.6 million square kilometers of territory, nearly 100 million people, and a complete industrial system, and 50,000 troops are far from enough to achieve occupation and control. If the U.S. forcibly launches ground operations, whether to seize islands in the strait or oil hubs, it will face the dilemma of Iran's mountainous terrain and popular resistance, repeat the fate of the Afghan war, and face the risk of heavy casualties and complete loss of control of the conflict. Ground operations are a red line that the U.S. military cannot touch. This conflict shows that the U.S. can no longer 'do as it pleases.' Middle Eastern countries have a clearer understanding of U.S. hegemonic ambitions and vulnerabilities. The U.S. can no longer shape regional situations decisively as it did in the past. Many scholars compare this war to the 1956 Suez Crisis, which is considered a symbolic event marking Britain's complete loss of dominance in the Middle East. The U.S.-Israel-Iran war may become the U.S.' 'Suez Moment,' leading to the accelerated loss of U.S. credibility and geopolitical influence in the Middle East and globally. The collapse of the U.S. rapid victory theory and the inability of many U.S. military bases in the Middle East to provide security guarantees have completely shattered its false image as a 'regional security guarantor.' Since the outbreak of the war, 27 major U.S. military bases in countries such as Jordan, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, and the UAE have been attacked, and at least 228 military facilities have been destroyed. The more these countries rely on the U.S. for security, the more likely they are to be drawn into conflicts instigated by the U.S. The U.S.' 'security guarantee' has instead become a 'risk source.' Gulf countries invest huge amounts of money to obtain U.S. security guarantees but find themselves trapped in a 'structural deadlock' where the deeper they depend on the U.S., the higher the security risk. How to get out of the dilemma? In the future, Middle Eastern countries, especially Gulf countries, will more firmly seek to diversify security partnerships and strengthen their own and collective defense capabilities, which will 'be more effective in maintaining national security than relying on external powers.' The self-awareness of regional powers has fully awakened, no longer attaching themselves to U.S. hegemony, and powers such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Iran are gradually rising. The regional order is shifting from 'U.S. monopoly' to 'multi-polar balance.' Even if Iran suffers losses from the war, it will enhance its regional prestige by daring to resist a superpower. The cohesion of the 'Axis of Resistance,' supported by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and covering more than 20 armed organizations in five countries including Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, and Yemen, will be further strengthened. In addition, the Middle East will also see the emergence of what is called the 'third force,' a combination of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt, which is trying to play a mediating and stabilizing role in the volatile Middle East situation. The current U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict will accelerate the strategic autonomy of Middle Eastern countries, promote regional integration and their own resilient development, and objectively promote the transition of the international order to a 'more balanced multi-polar framework.' The U.S. will increasingly be seen as a force that disrupts stability, and its hegemony will decline accordingly.