Just six weeks in, we’ve already got “global Economic scars” that will “define a generation”. That was fast.
The Iran War has been going on for less than six weeks, has thus far involved no infantry engagements of any kind on either side, and is currently in the middle of a ceasefire.
Does that sound like a conflict that can already be described as going to “define our generation”?
Because that’s what Sir Keir Starmer said earlier today.
Now, politicians engaging in hyperbole for the sake of a soundbite is hardly rare, but Starmer is far from alone in this over-statement…
The New Republic is calling Iran “the greatest strategic blunder in American military history”.
Let’s remind ourselves that official figures claim fewer than twenty US losses, no boots on the ground and – again – currently in a ceasefire after six weeks of fighting.
With respect, this is not even in the top two US military disasters of this century.
Iraq and Afghanistan cost trillions, lasted decades and in strategic terms achieved next to nothing – and though many, myself included, would argue that was potentially very much the point – officially they are very definitely disasters.
To already brand the Iran venture on that level reeks of agenda setting.
And at the same time, we’re being prepped for the economic impact of the (as yet) six-week-old war to last for years, by outlets like the New Statesman:
The Iran energy fallout is here to stay – It will take years for global markets to recover from the crisis
Foreign Affairs says the war is “upending the economy”.
The FT is warning of “long term scars”, while Fortune think it’s “re-shaping global power”.
Al Jazeera is wondering how global supply chains will ever recover.
Most tellingly of all, the head of the International Monetary Fund is out there declaring…
Iran war will permanently scar global economy even if peace is reached
You see, even if peace were declared tomorrow, it’s too late. We’re scarred.
She even added that the “most hopeful scenario” will cause a “permanent hit to living standards”…which she probably didn’t mean quite the way it sounds.
This is a LOT of premature narrative formation. Propaganda that spits out the answer before the teacher has even finished asking the question.
And it’s a tell-tale sign of narrative roll-out, rather than an organic reaction to real events.
I wonder what the end goal might be…
Of course he didn’t mean it that way but – hmmm.
Maybe this war will “define our generation”, but based on current information it will be because that was the plan from the beginning.
