Ahmed Swapan Mahmud
“We are already at war.” These are the stark words of Russian philosopher and political analyst Aleksandr Dugin in response to the recent U.S. bombing of Iran. This is not a prediction of the future—it is a grim reality of the present. In recent weeks, the United States, disregarding international norms and bypassing congressional oversight, has launched unprovoked strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Israel, operating under U.S. cover, has reportedly killed hundreds, including senior military officers, nuclear scientists, and civilians in Iran. Together, the U.S. and Israel have sparked a new wave of tension across the Middle East.
Iran has responded with intense missile attacks on Israeli targets. Meanwhile, the Russia–Ukraine war rages on, China is preparing militarily, and the Houthis have effectively blocked trade routes through the Red Sea. The Iranian parliament has already granted permission to close the Strait of Hormuz—one of the world’s most vital energy arteries. These developments are not isolated events but signals of a looming global conflict, where neutrality may no longer be an option for any nation.
The U.S. airstrikes on Iran’s key military infrastructure were not just attacks on a sovereign state—they were strategic strikes on an entire geopolitical order. These acts are part of a broader agenda to suppress Iran’s influence in the region. As Dugin states, “If nothing stopped them from bombing Iran, then nothing will stop them from targeting us next. At some point, they may decide that Russia, like Iran, shouldn’t be allowed to possess nuclear weapons – or find some other pretext to strike. Make no mistake: we are at war.
Dugin draws a sharp comparison between Ukraine and Israel. “The US can attack whether we advance or retreat. It’s not about strategy – it’s about will. Ukraine may not be Israel in the eyes of the West, but it plays a similar role. Israel didn’t always exist; it was created and quickly became a proxy for the collective West – though some Israelis would argue the opposite, that the West is merely a proxy for Israel. Ukraine has followed the same trajectory” he explains. Israel has for years bombed Gaza with impunity, and Ukraine has, likewise, carried out long-running military campaigns in Donbas against Russian-aligned separatists—albeit with less visibility on the international stage.
This raises an urgent question: how can one side claim to seek peace while simultaneously pursuing unrestrained aggression? In a recent statement, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky made the contradiction even more apparent when he said, “We don’t just want support from the West—we demand advanced weaponry, including nuclear arms.” This is no longer diplomacy—it is a proxy state openly embracing its role in a larger war theater.
The Strait of Hormuz, a central artery of global energy flow, is now virtually closed. The Houthis have disrupted commercial shipping in the Red Sea. These flashpoints are rapidly converging into a global crisis. Although China has not yet entered the war directly, Beijing’s state-run Global Times warned: “If the war in the Middle East affects our oil and tech supplies, China will be forced to respond.”
Houthi leader Abdul-Malik al-Houthi was even more explicit: “We are not just fighting for Yemen. We represent the oppressed peoples of the world against Western aggression.” This makes it clear—what’s unfolding is not merely a state-versus-state conflict. It is a direct challenge to the current global order.
Dugin further asserts that former U.S. President Donald Trump is once again under the influence of neoconservatives. “The MAGA project is over,” Dugin says. America’s so-called revolutionary nationalism has now devolved into old-style globalism. The result is a growing wave of Western militarism—aggression in the Middle East, rising military expenditures in Europe, and escalating tensions in Asia. Even Trump, who once championed the slogan “Make Deals, Not War,” now endorses outright military action.
Let us recall that after ordering the 2020 drone strike that killed General Qasem Soleimani, Trump said, “We do not seek war, but if someone harms us, we will not stay silent.” What was then framed as “self-defense” has now become the first act of a full-scale war doctrine.
In this critical moment, the United Nations has proved largely impotent. While countries like Russia, Iran, and China call for diplomacy and peace, Western veto power continues to obstruct any meaningful intervention. At a press briefing, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov remarked, “The UN has become a stage where war policies are granted legitimacy under the guise of diplomacy.” Iran’s President echoed the same sentiment: “If the UN fails to act, we will exercise our right to self-defense.”
As Dugin puts it, “The question isn’t whether to fight. Russia is already fighting. The question is how. The old methods are exhausted. That means we’ll have to find a new way to fight – and fast.” For Russia, this is a moment of strategic recalibration. Treaties with the West, and UN-mediated diplomacy have all failed. What is now needed is a new kind of warfare effective not only on the battlefield but across the diplomatic, economic, and cultural spheres.
So, are we heading into World War III?
If we look only at the failure of diplomacy, the UN’s inaction, and the monopolistic designs of the Western powers, the answer is a chilling “yes.” But if humanity can pause and ask itself what the real cost of this war will be, there may still be time to step back from the brink.
As Dugin warns, “If Iran folds, it won’t just lose itself – it will expose the rest of us. That includes Russia, now facing an existential choice.” His warning applies not only to Russia but to the entire world. We now stand at a historical crossroads where one mistake, one bomb, or even one reckless statement could ignite a new world war.
Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that both Israel and Iran have agreed to a ceasefire. Diplomatically, however, Iran clarified that the war has not ended from its perspective. Tehran stated that it would only uphold the ceasefire if Israel fully halts its attacks on Iranian territory.
But this raises a crucial question: who truly won this war? If one claims that Iran did, the answer is not so simple. Iran may have demonstrated strategic resilience and military capability, but it will not easily forget the deep wounds inflicted by the U.S.-Israel alliance, the targeted assassinations of its top generals, nuclear scientists, and the deaths of countless civilians.
Even after a ceasefire, there remains a risk that Israel could launch further attacks. Yet, Iran has undeniably shifted the global discourse. It has asserted its right to nuclear development and, more importantly, to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. The international community is now more attuned to the argument that no nation, however isolated, should be denied the means to protect itself.
No war, but peace. We must hope for peace—but never confuse hope with complacency.
Ahmed Swapan Mahmud is a poet and political analyst. He can be reached at ahmed.swapan@gmail.com
[The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Bangladesh Now. The publication bears no responsibility for the accuracy of any statements made or for any potential consequences arising from the content.]
