JusT days after denying any involvement in Israel`s decision to attack Iran, the United States jumped into the arena to defend Israel. Given the transactionalnature of American President Donald Trump`s idea of running his administration, this looked hardly surprising. However, diplomacy is a game of long-term and calculated choices.

Conversely, a temperamental approach in foreign policy fails to pay the dividends.

From this perspective, the US approach towards the Middle East conflict could severely compromise its own long-term geopolitical goals and its claim of being a peacemaker in the so-called liberal international order.

The US government had zero public support behind its decision. In fact, the idea failed to fascinate the massive majority of Americans. Previous such offshore US experiments have proved to be abject failures. Apart from inciting anti-war sentiments at home, these wars significantly reduced overall American credibility abroad.

Even if, hypothetically speaking, the US and Israel do succeed at some point in orchestrating a regime change in Iran, would it fulfil the core US objectives in the Middle East? No. Even if the US-Israel alliance may have dismantled Iran`s nuclear-weapon infrastructure, it has not necessarily eradicated the knowledge and infrastructure related to the nuclear weapons.

Moreover, it would actually encourage the Iranians to pursue the nuclear programme even more vigorously in search of national security against a hostile country in the region.

Besides, the situation would not at all be favourable for US allies in the Middle East either. With US-Arab relations already sailing through stormy waters, the oil-rich Gulf states must be alarmed at the US act of simply giving a blank cheque to Israel.

In the emerging world order, a single wrong decision could potentially result in a checkmate on the geopolitical chessboard. The Americans should at least worry about American interests.

Talha K aleem Bajwa Gujranwala