Economist and former UN adviser Jeffrey Sachs says the conflict with Iran has evolved far beyond a regional war and is now a struggle over the future shape of the international system itself.
By INR International Desk
Speaking with Lena Petrova on the World Affairs In Context podcast, Sachs argued that Washington's objectives in the conflict extend well beyond Iran and are rooted in a broader effort to preserve American global dominance at a time when the world is rapidly moving toward a multipolar order.
According to Sachs, the war has failed to achieve its primary objectives while simultaneously increasing the risk of a global economic and energy crisis.
"The United States and Israel can't win it. They can't win it without causing global disaster," Sachs said.
A War Without Public Support
Sachs argued that the conflict has been conducted largely without public backing in the United States and without meaningful congressional approval.
He claimed that ordinary Americans are already feeling the economic consequences through rising fuel prices, transportation costs, food costs and inflationary pressures throughout the economy.
"Everything that uses hydrocarbons, oil, petroleum, air flights, plastics, petrochemicals, fertilizers, all bears the effects of this war."
According to Sachs, the war is being financed through growing government debt while the American public is left carrying the long-term financial burden.
The Battle For Hegemony
One of the central themes of the discussion was Sachs' belief that the conflict is fundamentally about preserving American global hegemony.
He argued that parts of the US foreign policy establishment continue to operate under the assumption that Washington should remain the dominant global power despite the emergence of multiple competing centres of influence.
"The mindset is America should run the show."
Sachs claimed that Iran represents one of the remaining countries resisting what he described as American geopolitical control in the Middle East.
He pointed to the 1953 CIA-backed overthrow of Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh and the subsequent decades of Western influence in Iran as historical context for current tensions.
According to Sachs, the 1979 Iranian Revolution fundamentally altered that relationship.
"Iran had its revolution in 1979 and they escaped the American Empire. Well, that's something you're not supposed to do."
Israel's Role In The Conflict
Sachs argued that support for the Palestinian cause has placed Iran in direct opposition to Israeli strategic objectives.
He described Israel's leadership as seeking complete regional dominance while opposing any settlement that would establish a Palestinian state.
According to Sachs, this has become a major driver of the broader confrontation.
"Israel opposes anything other than complete Israeli dominance."
He argued that efforts to isolate or weaken Iran are closely linked to this wider regional struggle.
Regime Change Failure
Sachs claimed that initial expectations of rapid regime change in Tehran proved unrealistic.
He argued that assumptions Iran could be destabilized through targeted strikes against leadership figures underestimated both the country's resilience and its military capabilities.
"There's no military option. You can't invade Iran. It's a big country with 90 million people, quite sophisticated."
According to Sachs, attempts to force political change have instead resulted in a prolonged stalemate.
"Since the regime change operation failed on the first day, we're in a completely bollocked-up situation."
He argued that continued escalation risks triggering a much wider regional conflict.
The Strait Of Hormuz And Energy Security
A major focus of the interview was the impact of the conflict on global energy markets.
Sachs warned that restrictions on shipping through the Strait of Hormuz are steadily eroding global oil reserves and creating conditions for a potentially severe energy shock.
"The world energy situation worsens every day."
He argued that current market conditions are masking deeper structural risks.
"This is going to lead to a major global economic crisis if we continue the way we're going right now."
According to Sachs, strategic reserves are being drawn down while supply disruptions continue to affect global markets.
Silicon Valley And The Security State
One of Sachs' most controversial arguments involved what he described as the growing relationship between the American security establishment and major technology companies.
He claimed that defence contractors and technology firms are benefiting from the conflict through weapons development, artificial intelligence applications and military technology testing.
"The American security state, such as it is, which now includes a lot of Silicon Valley, supports the war."
Sachs specifically argued that artificial intelligence is increasingly being integrated into military systems through battlefield testing.
He suggested that financial incentives are contributing to continued support for the conflict among influential corporate interests.
Could Washington Stop The War?
Sachs rejected the notion that the United States lacks leverage over Israel.
He argued that Washington could rapidly alter Israeli policy by suspending military assistance, financial support and diplomatic backing.
"If the president of the United States said Israel has to stop, Israel would stop immediately."
According to Sachs, the United States retains overwhelming influence over Israeli decision-making but has chosen not to exercise it.
Three Possible Economic Futures
When asked about the global economy, Sachs outlined three potential scenarios.
The first involves a major escalation of the conflict.
Under that scenario, he warned of a full-scale energy shock accompanied by severe economic and humanitarian consequences.
"It would be a global calamity."
The second scenario involves the continuation of the current conflict at its present intensity.
In that case Sachs expects a slower-moving but still serious economic crisis driven by energy shortages, higher oil prices and declining reserves.
The third scenario would involve de-escalation and the reopening of normal shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz.
Under that outcome, Sachs believes energy prices would ease and economic pressures would begin to moderate.
His preferred solution remains straightforward.
"Just go home. Stop it. You made a mistake."
The Rise Of A Multipolar World
Perhaps Sachs' most significant argument concerned what he sees as the irreversible shift toward a multipolar international order.
He argued that Washington continues to operate as though the unipolar moment of the 1990s still exists.
In reality, he says, multiple power centres now shape global affairs.
"We're already in a multipolar world."
Sachs identified the United States, China, Russia and India as major powers, while pointing to countries such as Iran, Turkey, Brazil, Indonesia and Pakistan as increasingly influential regional actors.
He argued that attempts to maintain unchallenged American dominance are becoming increasingly detached from geopolitical reality.
"You have to be delusional to think that at 4% of the world's population, you should even try to run the other 96% of the world."
A World In Transition
Throughout the interview Sachs repeatedly returned to a single theme: the world is undergoing a profound geopolitical transformation.
He argued that nations across Europe, the Middle East and Asia are increasingly reassessing their relationships with Washington while seeking greater strategic flexibility.
According to Sachs, efforts to preserve a fading unipolar order are colliding with the emergence of a more distributed global balance of power.
His closing message was directed at American policymakers.
"Wake up to reality before you wreck everything."
Source: World Affairs In Context interview with Professor Jeffrey Sachs hosted by Lena Petrova.