EDITORIAL: US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has reportedly been moved from his Washington DC residence to a military base following Iran-linked threats to his life. The reported relocation is significant not merely as a security concern for a senior American official, but also as an indication of how the consequences of this war of choice, initiated by Washington and Tel Aviv, are reaching into America’s own political and security establishment.
Bessent, who has spearheaded Washington’s campaign to isolate Iran through sanctions and a wider economic blockade, is himself a reminder that the repercussions of this confrontation extend well beyond the battlefield. While the US-Israeli military campaign against Iran remains locked in a protracted and dangerous standoff, its economic costs, strategic disruptions and security repercussions are being borne not only by the protagonists but also by the wider international community.
Washington may have calculated that military pressure, the elimination of Iran’s leadership and an intensified economic blockade would force Tehran into submission. Yet the unfolding crisis has exposed the limitations of its calculus. Despite severe military and economic hits Iran has neither capitulated nor abandoned its capacity to retaliate. Instead, the conflict has escalated into a wider regional confrontation, threatening maritime shipping, energy supplies and the security of Gulf countries.
The wider world, meanwhile, is paying an economic price for a conflict it neither initiated nor can control. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz, through which approximately one-fifth of global oil and gas supplies normally transit, has exposed the vulnerability of international energy markets to geopolitical disruption. For energy-importing developing countries such as Pakistan, already grappling with fiscal constraints and external financing pressures, the consequences are particularly serious. Governments face the unenviable choice of absorbing higher import bills, passing additional costs on to consumers or diverting scarce public resources from development priorities to energy subsidies.
The conflict also carries significant geostrategic implications. It is deepening regional mistrust and compelling countries to reassess their security alignments. US allies in the Gulf, in particular, face the consequences of hosting American military bases while remaining exposed to the risk of Iranian retaliation. The irony is that a military campaign intended to enhance Israeli-American interests, ostensibly also security of Washington’s Gulf allies, has instead produced greater insecurity, including for those directing it. The relocation of senior US officials to military installations is a domestic manifestation of a crisis whose international repercussions are considerably greater.
This is the fundamental predicament of a war of choice: its initiators may exercise considerable control over when it begins, but they cannot dictate its duration, geographical spread or economic consequences. Nor can they confine its costs to the intended adversary.
The international community must not become the collateral victim of Washington’s strategic miscalculation leading to an illegal and immoral war of aggression. What is urgently needed is a sustained diplomatic initiative to end further military escalation, and secure a negotiated settlement that offers durable peace. A prolonged confrontation will only multiply the price that the rest of the world is being forced to pay for a war it never chose.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026
Comments