The Iran war is accelerating a global shift toward rival security blocs, new energy corridors and a world in which the United States can no longer dictate the strategic choices of other countries, says geopolitical analyst Abishur Prakash.
In an interview with Energi Media (see below), Prakash described the conflict as a geopolitical quagmire that is depleting U.S. military resources, pulling American assets away from Asia and reshaping Washington’s relationships with Europe and Gulf allies. He said Iran remains in a strong position and is rebuilding air defences and missile capabilities while signalling a willingness to continue fighting.
Prakash argues the deeper change is institutional.
The post-1945 international order was largely constructed by the United States, including the trade, financial and diplomatic institutions that shaped global economic relations. Today, he said, Washington itself is moving away from parts of that system through unilateral tariffs, bilateral diplomacy and increasingly coercive uses of power.
Other governments are responding by building their own arrangements. Prakash compared the emerging system to the period before the First World War, when competing alliances and mutual-defence obligations created the risk that a regional conflict could rapidly widen. He pointed to the new Saudi Arabia-Turkey-Pakistan mutual-defence pact as a sign of that shift.
Energy security is becoming part of the same geopolitical restructuring. Prakash highlighted comments by U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggesting the Strait of Hormuz could become ‘irrelevant’ if 60 to 80 per cent of the energy currently passing through it were redirected through underground pipelines within two years.
Prakash said the timeline is unlikely, but the proposal provides a window into a possible change in U.S. strategy. If Washington cannot remove Iran’s leverage over Hormuz through military force, it may try to reduce the chokepoint’s importance by constructing alternative infrastructure across the Middle East.
Such a plan would face major political and sovereignty obstacles. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and other Gulf exporters would have to decide how much control they were willing to surrender if their energy exports depended on pipelines and ports located outside their own territory.
Prakash said the broader global response to instability is likely to include more regional defence arrangements in Asia and Europe as governments question whether the United States would intervene in future conflicts involving allies such as Japan, South Korea, the Philippines or Taiwan.
China is taking a different approach.
Prakash said Beijing is keeping its diplomatic and economic options open and benefiting from a perception that it offers stability while the United States is creating disruption. He rejected the idea that the result will simply be declining American power and rising Chinese power. Instead, he expects a more fragmented system in which countries align with different powers depending on the issue, while others pursue greater strategic autonomy.
Canada should use its relative stability as an advantage, Prakash said, while developing more flexible trade and geopolitical relationships. The larger challenge is execution: Canada must be able to deliver useful energy, technology, infrastructure and economic solutions quickly enough to matter in a rapidly changing world.
Be the first to comment