Trump faces historic crisis in Iran

Protests against the war in Iran at RAF Fairford in Britain

Donald Trump’s war on Iran has turned into the biggest crisis for US imperialism in its history.

It’s on a bigger scale than Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam—or even the Suez Crisis of 1956 which sunk the British Empire.

But unlike Suez this crisis is still unfolding. The crisis combines military escalation, economic shock and geopolitical fragmentation on a scale far beyond 1956.

The question is no longer simply whether the US can win in Iran, but whether it can impose order.

And that uncertainty is precisely what gives this crisis its historic weight.

Crucially, this is not a contained confrontation. It is entangled with an increasingly volatile Israel, emboldened yet simultaneously vulnerable.

The alignment of the Gulf powers, such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE, with the US is more transactional than at any point in decades.

And there’s the possibility that the Iranian regime could emerge not as a contained adversary, but as a strengthened regional player.

In that scenario control over the Strait of Hormuz becomes not just a regional lever, but a global economic weapon.

At the same time, the US faces drift among its allies in Europe who want to preserve the liberal imperialist order.

Public opinion across both sides of the Atlantic has turned sharply against another prolonged war.

This erosion of both cohesion within the elites and popular consent limits the ability of the US to translate military power into political order.

What is at stake is no longer simply the outcome of a confrontation with Iran, but the viability of the entire architecture of US hegemony.

This broader unravelling extends across the Gulf. The long-standing arrangement—“security” in exchange for hosting US bases—is under visible strain.

Faced with the risk of being drawn into a widening war, these regimes are caught between dependence on the US and fear of becoming direct targets.

Even within this bloc, fractures are opening. Israeli media reported a de facto understanding between Qatar and Iran, reflected in the cessation of US attacks from Qatari territory and Iranian restraint.

The implications run deeper than diplomatic manoeuvring. The Gulf states are being reminded that they sit below Israel in US strategic priorities.

The consequences for the regimes are domestic too—even regimes long presented as stable are showing signs of strain.

In Bahrain murmurings last month that the ruling Al Khalifa family was preparing evacuation underline the depth of anxiety.

External pressure and the high number of Shia Muslims in Bahrain—Iran is majority Shia too—certainly play a part.

But this is a story of internal contradictions in Bahrain, where the Arab Spring was crushed by Saudi military force in 2011, beginning to resurface.

Nor is the Iran crisis confined to the region.

Rival powers are actively shaping its trajectory. Russia is both profiting from rising oil prices and deepening its material support for Iran.

China appears to be using the conflict as a testing ground—reportedly supplying components and studying US systems, tactics, and vulnerabilities in real time.

What is emerging is not simply a regional war, but a laboratory for a world in which US dominance is no longer uncontested.

There is no easy way out for Trump, who’s stuck between an Iranian “rock” and an Israeli “hard place”.

Iran benefits from prolonging the crisis, while Israel cannot accept any outcome in which Iran emerges strengthened.

The dynamic points toward further escalation as we’ve seen with the US blockade on the Strait of Hormuz.

The problem facing the US is no longer simply one of battlefield success, but of systemic control.

Across the region, class tensions are rising within societies long held in place by repression. 

These processes do not unfold in neat or predictable ways, but they point to a region in flux, where old arrangements are coming undone.

For those in Britain, the implications are immediate. This is a deeply unpopular war that will be paid for through declining living standards and further pressure on the working class.

Opposition cannot stop at condemnation—it must take the form of a refusal to bear the costs of the imperialist crisis.

Revolutions do not arrive in neat packages, nor on predictable timelines. But periods of systemic breakdown create openings—uneven, uncertain, and contested.

What is unfolding is a crisis in the structure of US-led power itself, signalling the likely end of US hegemony in the Middle East.

The task for revolutionaries is not to predict every outcome with certainty, but to recognise the opening—and act on it.