Yayasan Pendidikan Indonesia Blog

Do Not Start Wars You Cannot Win: A Geopolitical and Diplomatic Analysis of the 2026 U.S.-Iran Conflict and Its Implications for Multilateral Governance

MYR Agung Sidayu – Chairman, Yayasan Pendidikan Indonesia – Special Consultative Status with ECOSOC, United Nations

Abstract

This scholarly article examines the strategic maxim “Do not start wars you cannot win” through the lens of the 2026 U.S.-Iran conflict, known as Operation Epic Fury. Drawing on official statements, congressional testimonies, and media reports, the analysis highlights the transition from initial U.S. confidence in rapid military success to prolonged stalemate, alongside a notable shift in Washington’s posture toward the United Nations—from institutional skepticism and funding reductions to appeals for multilateral support. The findings underscore the risks of unilateral military engagements in complex regional environments, the limits of military superiority against asymmetric responses, and the erosion of trust in global governance when multilateral institutions are selectively engaged. This case illustrates the enduring relevance of prudent statesmanship, strategic humility, and consistent multilateralism grounded in the UN Charter. reuters.com 

Keywords: U.S.-Iran conflict, Operation Epic Fury, multilateralism, UN funding, Strait of Hormuz, strategic prudence, international relations theory.

1. Introduction

In international relations, the decision to initiate armed conflict carries profound long-term consequences. Realist and neorealist theories emphasize the importance of rational calculation of capabilities, costs, and probable outcomes (Waltz, 1979; Morgenthau, 1948). The historical record—from overextended empires to modern protracted conflicts—consistently validates the maxim: Do not start wars you cannot win. Failure to achieve decisive strategic objectives often leads to diminished credibility, economic ripple effects, and domestic political costs. newsweek.com 

The 2026 U.S.-Iran confrontation provides a contemporary case study. Launched in late February 2026, this conflict tested assumptions about rapid military dominance in an era of regional proxy networks and critical maritime chokepoints.

2. Methodology

This article employs a qualitative case-study approach supported by content analysis of primary sources (U.S. State Department remarks and congressional testimonies) and secondary reporting from reputable outlets. The temporal scope covers February to July 2026, focusing on military developments, diplomatic narratives, and institutional interactions.

3. Early Confidence and Harsh Realities

On or around February 28, 2026, the United States, in coordination with Israel, initiated Operation Epic Fury through airstrikes targeting Iranian missile capabilities, naval assets, nuclear infrastructure, and proxy support networks. Senior U.S. officials, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, expressed optimism that the operation would conclude in “weeks, not months,” achieve its objectives without large-scale ground troops, and leave Iran substantially weakened. newsweek.com 

Iran responded with asymmetric measures, including strikes on shipping and mining operations in the Strait of Hormuz—a vital artery for global energy flows. Although a ceasefire was announced in April 2026, it faced repeated violations. By June 2026, Secretary Rubio informed Congress that the “war is over,” citing significant degradation of Iranian capabilities and economic damage. However, lawmakers and analysts highlighted persistent disruptions, elevated global oil prices, stalled negotiations over the Strait, and incomplete achievement of core non-proliferation goals. usatoday.com 

This phase of the conflict demonstrates the inherent limitations of conventional military superiority when adversaries leverage geography, asymmetric tactics, and resilience. Prolonged interference with maritime commerce in the Strait of Hormuz generated economic externalities far exceeding the immediate theater of operations.

4. The UN Reversal: From Dismissal to Selective Appeal

A particularly instructive dimension of the crisis concerns U.S. policy toward the United Nations. Early in the conflict, consistent with longstanding skepticism and an “America First” orientation, the administration portrayed the UN as ineffective on core security issues. Secretary Rubio and others criticized the body’s perceived failure to condemn Iranian actions in the Strait of Hormuz or pass U.S.-backed resolutions decisively. youtube.com 

This stance aligned with concrete policy measures implemented since 2025, including significant cuts to UN funding, rescissions of contributions, staff reductions, and reforms that prioritized bilateral leverage and conditional support for peacekeeping and aid programs. lowyinstitute.org 

As the conflict proved more intractable—with negotiations over sanctions relief, nuclear constraints, and Strait access dragging on—reports emerged of U.S. appeals to UN mechanisms for international pressure and legitimacy. To observers, this represented a pragmatic but ironic pivot: an institution previously deemed incapable of meaningful constraint on U.S. action was now invoked to manage fallout and share burdens. youtube.com 

Listen carefully to US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
The desperation is clearly dripping from every word.
Watching him now suddenly appeal to the UN is rich, considering his own administration branded it as irrelevant, undermined it, and slashed its funding.

There is a lesson… pic.twitter.com/QKSCXKg1fJ

— Richard (@ricwe123) July 17, 2026

Such selective engagement risks eroding the credibility of multilateral institutions. When powerful states undermine an organization’s resources and authority, then seek its endorsement during periods of difficulty, the foundations of rules-based global governance are weakened.

5. Theoretical and Practical Lessons

This case reaffirms several enduring principles:

•  Strategic Prudence: Military superiority does not automatically translate into strategic victory. Adversaries employing asymmetric tactics, combined with global economic interdependence, can impose costs that outweigh initial gains.

•  Ownership of Consequences: Effective leadership requires honest upfront risk assessment rather than post-hoc attribution of setbacks to institutional shortcomings.

•  Shared Responsibility and Multilateralism: As an ECOSOC-accredited organization, Yayasan Pendidikan Indonesia affirms the value of multilateralism rooted in the UN Charter—respect for sovereignty, peaceful dispute settlement, and collective security. Conflicts that destabilize energy markets or risk escalation disproportionately harm vulnerable populations and demand broad accountability.

•  Strategic Humility: True strength lies in recognizing when diplomacy, deterrence, and targeted pressure are more effective than open-ended conflict. Iran’s demonstrated resilience highlights the constraints even superpowers face in multipolar or regionally complex environments.

6. Conclusion

The 2026 U.S.-Iran conflict serves as a cautionary tale in contemporary international relations. It validates the maxim “Do not start wars you cannot win” not as pacifism, but as a call for evidence-based strategic decision-making. The observed reversal in U.S. engagement with the UN further illustrates the tensions between unilateral impulses and the persistent need for multilateral legitimacy.

For the sake of global stability, prosperity, and future generations, states—particularly great powers—must prioritize consistent principles over selective engagement. History ultimately judges not merely the initiation of conflict, but the wisdom shown in its conduct, termination, and the integrity with which its lessons are internalized.

References

•  Indian Express. (2026). Reports on Operation Epic Fury and Strait of Hormuz.

•  Lowly Institute. (2026). Analysis of UN budget crisis.

•  Newsweek & Nikkei Asia. (2026). Coverage of U.S. objectives and timelines.

•  Reuters & USA Today. (2026). Congressional testimonies and conflict developments.

•  U.S. Department of State. (2026). Official remarks by Secretary Marco Rubio.

•  Various YouTube transcripts of official briefings (2026).