Journalist

Lee Hee-soo
  • OPINION: War without order and reason
    OPINION: War without order and reason The war launched by the United States and Israel against Iran has entered its sixth week, with no clear end in sight. What began as a show of force has instead evolved into a grinding conflict, disrupting global energy flows, rattling markets and exposing the fragility of international order. Each morning, attention turns less to the battlefield than to Washington — to President Donald Trump’s shifting rhetoric, deadlines and threats. Policy, it seems, is being made in real time. This war should not have begun in the first place. It lacks a coherent rationale, let alone an exit strategy. Its origins appear tied as much to Israeli domestic politics and regional ambitions as to any immediate security necessity. For Trump, who once cast himself as a peacemaker and even a Nobel aspirant, the contradiction is stark. His presidency has instead coincided with the prolongation or expansion of conflicts from Ukraine to Gaza, Lebanon and now Iran. More troubling is the broader collapse of the postwar system. The institutions built after World War II to prevent large-scale violence — the United Nations, peacekeeping frameworks, even international courts — are increasingly sidelined. What remains is not a transition to a stable multipolar order, but a vacuum where power alone dictates outcomes. From Tehran, the war is framed differently. Iranian media call it “Trump’s war,” contrasting what they see as Iran’s historical continuity with what they portray as American impulsiveness. The comparison is not merely rhetorical. It reflects a deeper failure of understanding — a tendency in Washington to reduce a complex civilization into a strategic target. Yet Iran’s own system is far from blameless. Decades of economic mismanagement, political rigidity and concentration of power have left its society strained. Inflation has surged, real incomes have collapsed, and recent protests — spanning more than 100 cities — revealed a population under acute pressure. Many had hoped for reform or diplomatic relief. Instead, war has intervened. The human cost is mounting. Among the dead is Dr. Kamal Karaji, a veteran diplomat and architect of Iran’s nuclear negotiations, killed in an Israeli strike. He was not a symbol of confrontation, but of engagement — a figure who argued that Iran’s future lay in economic development, not nuclear armament. His death underscores a dangerous shift: the targeting of those who might have enabled diplomacy. That shift also deepens the central problem — trust. The United States withdrew from the 2015 nuclear agreement unilaterally. It launched strikes even as talks were underway. It issued ultimatums, then acted before deadlines expired. Under such conditions, negotiations become indistinguishable from coercion. Iran, for its part, is unlikely to capitulate. Its leadership structure is designed for continuity, with layers of succession and a political culture that frames loss as martyrdom. Even as senior figures are eliminated, replacements step in. The system bends, but does not break. The result is a conflict with no natural off-ramp. There are, in theory, areas for compromise — limits on nuclear development, calibrated missile constraints, managed access through the Strait of Hormuz. But these require a minimum level of credibility. Without it, even reasonable proposals become nonstarters. What is at stake now extends beyond Iran. It is the question of whether rules still matter in international relations — or whether the world is entering an era where power is exercised without constraint and justified after the fact. If cities like Rome or Vienna were subjected to similar bombardment, the global response would be immediate and unified. That it is not, in this case, speaks volumes. This is no longer just a regional war. It is a test of whether the idea of order itself still holds. *The author is a professor emeritus at the Department of Cultural Anthropology at Hanyang University. About the author ▷Hankuk University of Foreign Studies ▷Ph.D. in history, Istanbul University, Turkey ▷Emeritus professor, Department of Cultural Anthropology, Hanyang University ▷Secretary-general, Korea-Türkiye Friendship Association ▷Academic committee member (South Korea representative), Central Asian Studies Institute (UNESCO-IICAS) ▷Chair professor, Sungkonghoe University ▷Director, Institute of Islamic Culture Research ▷About 90 books published in South Korea and abroad 2026-04-09 07:24:57
  • OPINION: Middle East conflict enters second week, leaving Trump with few options
    OPINION: Middle East conflict enters second week, leaving Trump with few options SEOUL, March 11 (AJP) - The ongoing Middle East conflict that began with U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on Iran has entered its second week, with fighting and retaliatory attacks spreading across the region and no end in sight as attention now turns to U.S. President Donald Trump's next move. Since the killing of Iran's former supreme leader Ali Khamenei shortly after the Feb. 28 U.S.-led military operation, senior Iranian military figures have been targeted and killed, and key military sites including nuclear facilities and ballistic missile bases have been destroyed. About 3,000 sites in Iran have been reportedly destroyed, and around 1,300 civilians have been killed including 168 elementary schoolgirls. More than 20 Iranian naval vessels are said to have been sunk, killing hundreds of sailors. Airstrikes have expanded to hit industrial and civilian infrastructure including oil storage facilities and refineries, prompting Iran to respond with retaliatory drone and missile attacks on energy and strategic sites in neighboring Gulf countries. Tehran, a city of some 10 million, has been shrouded in thick black smoke, with oily residue from destroyed oil facilities raining down on the capital and worsening severe pollution and water shortages. With civilian casualties rising and oil prices surging, calls for an immediate end to the war have grown louder, but Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have only become more hardline. Trump's early confidence that the war would last just a few weeks has faded, replaced by talk of a weekslong conflict, possible ground operations, regime change, unconditional surrender, and threats to kill any new supreme leader not approved by him. Analysts see little room for diplomacy, as the United Nations' influence wanes, international law loses its teeth, and meaningful mediation hard to come by. But the question remains. Why did the U.S. launch the military operation codenamed "Operation Epic Fury," even as nuclear talks in Geneva were reportedly making "positive progress," according to Oman's foreign minister and the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency just two days earlier. Behind the war lies Israel's influence. Netanyahu has long opposed limited nuclear deals with Iran, arguing they fall short of his goals dismantling Iran's nuclear and missile programs and weakening the regime's grip on power, pushing Washington toward a more confrontational path. Iran's internal unrest may also have emboldened Trump. Crippled by U.S. sanctions, the country was already buckling under economic paralysis, with protests over livelihoods spreading even among the regime's traditional supporters. Its brutal crackdown only deepened the crisis, what many described as the gravest challenge the regime has faced since coming to power in 1979. After three years of war in Gaza and with Israel effectively controlling most of the West Bank, territory long envisioned for a future Palestinian state, Netanyahu came to see Iran as the last major obstacle standing in his way. Some 151 countries including many in Europe, recognize Palestinian statehood, while Netanyahu faces an arrest warrant over the Gaza war. With an early general election looming in October, he may have felt an urgent need to bolster domestic support. Public sentiment in Iran seems to be shifting from hope to fear to anger. After 37 years under autocratic, one‑man rule, many had expected democratic reforms and better living conditions. Instead, their protests were met with a brutal crackdown that has cost thousands of lives. But as U.S. strikes expanded beyond military targets, killing large numbers of civilians, anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiment surged sharply. The best scenario, as some argue, would be for Trump to end the war quickly after finding a way to declare victory. But instead, Trump is considering deploying ground forces, demanding Iran's complete surrender. Otherwise, ending the war would be difficult for both Iran's leadership and its people, given Iran's long, 2,500‑year history and collective memory of enduring an eight‑year war with Iraq, during which the U.S. backed Iraq, and decades of crippling sanctions since 1979. Iran has blocked the Strait of Hormuz, disrupting oil and gas flows and pushing prices toward US$150 a barrel. The global economy is feeling the strain, with South Korea among the hardest hit, nearly 80 percent of its crude oil comes from the Middle East. Iran has also established a succession structure, with a three-person interim authority now in place. Iranian clerics have named Mojtaba Khamenei, the second-eldest son of the late leader, as the next supreme leader. The choice of a hardline conservative signals a determination to fight on. Even if the war ends, Iran's economic crisis leaves it with only one option, negotiation and compromise with the U.S., as no government would survive indefinitely under American sanctions and blockade. As war fatigue grows and global economic strain deepens, two things are worth watching. The first is whether the U.S. and Israel will accept Mojtaba as a negotiating counterpart. If he is killed, anger inside Iran could deepen, making the conflict harder to contain and far more prolonged. The second is whether the U.S. will deploy ground forces. A plan to send a U.S.-backed Kurdish militia into Iran appears to have stalled, hampered by infighting among Kurdish factions as well as objections from the Iraqi and Turkish governments. Instead, the U.S. is reportedly preparing elite special forces to seize and destroy Iran's enriched uranium stockpiles. Any ground deployment, however, carries serious risks and could turn the conflict into a long, costly war. There is still no clear exit, but extending the war indefinitely would also burden Trump ahead of the midterm elections in November, given negative U.S. public opinion and his emphasis on presenting himself as a peace broker. But Netanyahu will likely keep pushing Trump to maintain military pressure, arguing that Iran must be thoroughly weakened to prevent it from threatening Israel again, and he has also vowed to continue offensive operations across the region. Nevertheless, a possible breakthrough could come from Trump's upcoming summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, scheduled later this month in Beijing. China, which buys roughly 80 percent of Iran's oil exports, holds the greatest leverage over Tehran and is actively mediating. As the war grinds on, South Korea is also urged to take a more active diplomatic role in pursuit of peace. * This article, published by Aju Business Daily, was translated by AI and edited by AJP. 2026-03-11 15:15:52