By Ambassador K.P. Fabian
“If Miss Pentagon is dressed up to go for a party, won’t she insist on having a party?”
That is the question uppermost in the mind of the global citizen, whether she or he is in the region or not. Will the United States permit Israel to attack Iran and then join the war—as happened in June 2025 while Washington was conducting negotiations with Tehran with Oman as a facilitator? Will the Pentagon, which has assembled two aircraft carriers—the USS Abraham Lincoln and the USS Gerald Ford—along with a set of F-35s, F-22s, and much else, withdraw all that without firing a shot?
If Miss Pentagon is dressed up for a party, won’t she insist on having one? What is the endgame that President Trump has in mind? Before attempting to figure out what is happening and what might happen in the coming days, let us look at the big picture. In December 2025, there were large-scale protests in Iran, initially triggered by the ever-rising cost of living. These soon transformed into a political demand, at least on the part of some of the protesters, for the regime to step down, with a focus on Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in power since 1981 as president and as Supreme Leader since 1989. There was active encouragement and material support from Israel, the U.S., and the Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, 65, a resident in the U.S. since his father lost the throne in 1979.
As First Secretary in the Indian Embassy in Tehran from 1976 to 1979, I had the privilege of witnessing the revolution as it started with street protests. Young Iranians, educated in the West, used to meet me asking questions about India and its democracy they admired. They wanted copies of the Constitution of India; we had to cyclostyle copies. In retrospect, one cannot help wishing that post-Shah Iran should have chosen to be a democracy rather than a theocracy.
The Genesis
History tells us that in 1953, after Prime Minister Mosaddegh nationalized the oil industry, Iran moved towards a constitutional democracy with the Shah as symbolic head of state. He fled to Rome and Iran became a proper democracy. The U.K. sought military intervention by the U.S., but President Eisenhower refused. However, he permitted the CIA to carry out a coup, roughly at a cost of $10,000, by bribing the generals. The Shah was brought back and he acted as America’s policeman in the region.
Is Iran planning to make an atomic bomb? To my mind, the answer is clear. If Iran had wanted, it could have made one or many more by now. There is no point in making a few. An adequate number matching Israel’s, or at least a good portion thereof, is required. That reminds me of the Shah’s plans. It is my belief that he had plans to make a bomb. He sent a letter of appointment to Raja Ramanna, the great scientist who was behind the 1974 PNE (Peaceful Nuclear Explosion) when Indira Gandhi was Prime Minister. The salary offered was high. Ramanna shared the letter with the Ministry of External Affairs, who sent it to the embassy.
Crippling Economic Sanctions
The main reason for Iran’s plight is the economic sanctions imposed on it by Washington following the seizure of its embassy in Tehran by a group of young militants after President Carter unwisely and unnecessarily granted political asylum to the Shah against the advice of his Secretary of State and the embassy in Iran. The account of the taking over of the U.S. embassy by the militants given in Wikipedia and Encyclopedia Britannica is incomplete and misleading.
On 1st November 1979, Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Adviser to President Carter, and Iranian Prime Minister Mehdi Bazargan met in Algeria’s capital. Brzezinski told Bazargan that the arms ordered by the Shah and already paid for would be delivered and that Washington and Tehran should work together to prevent Soviet expansion in the region. Bazargan agreed. At some point, Bazargan was informed that the Shah got asylum in the United States. He immediately demanded that the Shah should be sent back to Iran. Brzezinski refused. The conversation ended. Three days later, the U.S. embassy was taken over. The militants acted on their own without any permission from Khomeini or Bazargan. Carter lost the election to Reagan, who had kept in touch with Tehran, and the hostages were released. Later, Carter regretted his decision.
To fast-forward history, President Obama took the lead for the 2015 Iran nuclear deal—JCPOA—ensuring complete inspection by the IAEA to prevent Iran from making a bomb. Sanctions were lifted. Trump walked out of the JCPOA in 2018 for no good reason and reimposed sanctions. If he had not done that, Iran’s economy would not have been damaged, causing protests. This is the big picture. Trump bears responsibility for the current crisis.
The author in no way wants to approve of the theocracy in Iran, which deserves a democracy. But Trump’s signal contribution to the present crisis should be highlighted.
We can look at the evolving scenarios:
A) Iran agrees to zero enrichment of uranium and Trump lifts sanctions. Netanyahu is unhappy.
B) Iran insists on limited enrichment and agrees to limit its missile programme.
C) As the situation shifts toward open conflict, the “green signal” for war appears to have been given. While the aim may be a “limited war,” a surrender by Iran remains most unlikely.
D) In this escalating cycle, Iran has begun responding to pressure by striking American bases and oil installations in the GCC and blockading the Strait of Hormuz. With oil prices spiking and the prospect of casualties reaching the U.S., Trump, Netanyahu, and the rest of the world find themselves in serious trouble. The 9 million Indians in the GCC are in grave danger, as such a large number cannot be evacuated in a jiffy.
It is for the responsible powers like London, Paris, Berlin, Beijing, and above all for Moscow to take a united stand and tell Trump to stop his march to folly. India as the leader of the Global South should also join the others in telling Trump to reflect and do the right thing. If Trump still hopes to get the Nobel Peace Prize, should he permit Netanyahu to start a war?
It is my view that when Trump announced tariffs on the rest of the world in April 2025, the rest of the world should have united against him and threatened retaliatory tariffs on America. That is another theme.
POST SCRIPTUM
The following was written as of 2nd March:
Death of the Supreme Leader: Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran since 1989 and president from 1981 to 1989, was killed by Israel. The Mossad, with human and electronic intelligence, was following his movements. Apparently, he was struck while in a meeting with his aides.
Trump’s Claims: Trump has claimed the Ayatollah and 48 others have been killed; his claims always merit fact-checking.
Call for Regime Change: Trump has called on Iranians to take over, claiming he has almost brought down the regime. This claim is untenable; the regime, though weakened, stands, and it would be foolhardy to predict an early death. Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi might not be acceptable as leader.
Retaliation: Iran has struck back with missiles and drones, killing three U.S. military men in Kuwait. Despite Trump’s warnings of likely casualties, there is political pressure on him to justify his decision to attack Iran directly to the American people.
GCC Impact: Iran has hit American bases in the GCC, causing casualties. The iconic 7-star Jumeirah Burj Al Arab has been damaged, airports have been closed, and stock markets in Abu Dhabi and Dubai have shut down.
Strategic Analysis: Israel has gained politically by driving a wedge between Iran and its Arab neighbors, leaving Iran practically isolated in the Islamic world. Iran likely believes the GCC has no control over the Pentagon’s use of local bases. By hitting hard to dislocate air travel and causing markets to shut, pressure will increase on Washington as oil prices shoot up beyond 10% following the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
Impact on India: India is not an actor able to influence this unscripted tragedy as it unfolds. Prime Minister Modi has spoken to the Israeli Prime Minister urging an early end to hostilities, though Netanyahu is unlikely to change course. Prime Minister Modi has not yet spoken to Iran’s President, Masoud Pezeshkian.
Security Concerns: India’s primary concern remains the security of its nationals: 1.05 lakh in Israel and about 10,000 in Iran. With flights off, evacuation by air is impossible, and evacuation by sea remains difficult. One assumes the MEA has thought it through.
