The world, before February 28—when the US and Israel decided to attack Iran and inflicted the biggest ever oil shock in the history of capitalism—was obsessed with AI model hallucinations. In the two weeks following that, debate increasingly centres on whether our near-term future depends on the hallucinations of one person who has brought the world to its current predicament: US President Donald Trump. His statements on the origins and future direction of the ongoing conflict have swung so wildly—sometimes simultaneously—that someone on X (formerly Twitter) joked that the new left leaning mayor of New York might have taught dialectics to Trump. The joke would be funny if the economic and human costs of the war were not so high, especially the former for countries and people uninvolved in starting the current conflict.. The Iran war and Trump’s unpredictable decisions highlight a fragile world order, rising geopolitical tensions and growing economic risks for global markets. (AFP). Where does this leave the rest of the world and what some starry-eyed folks still like to call the world order? Let us begin with the most obvious answer.. There is no world order right now. Trump not only completely bypassed existing international and even U.S. rules to launch the war, but he also, most likely, ignored U.S. intelligence regarding not just Iran but also U.S. capabilities, such as munition inventories before entering the conflict. Trump’s latest admission suggests his son-in-law’s input mattered most in his decision to launch the war. The only country which can perhaps claim to have violated more international laws than Trump has recently is Israel in the aftermath of the unequivocally barbaric attacks by Hamas on innocent Israeli citizens. There is a growing consensus among foreign policy observers that US’s policy today is the proverbial dog which is being wagged by its Israeli tail.. To be sure, Trump is not the only US president who has bypassed international rules to launch a war. But he might very well be the first to drag it in a war where the US is, in a way, doing exactly what the last GOP president before Trump, George W Bush Junior warned against. “I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt”, Bush had said after he attacked Afghanistan to avenge the 9/11 attacks on the US. Trump today is firing missiles worth billions of dollars to intercept Iranian drones worth a few thousand dollars. It is no wonder the latter keep coming and the US is increasingly running out of the former and even having to redeploy them from other important geopolitical theatres, as was described in detail in this Bloomberg story.. Some would say that Trump should never even have engaged with such a decision in the first place. He was, after all, the darling of the MAGA coalition, which has been vocally against any outside military intervention by the US. Well, it turns out, this narrative might have j 

 India’s stance on the US-Israel attack on Iran, and the latter’s widening of the conflict to Arab countries and oil trade routes, need not be governed by “emotional” reasons, a top Indian ex-diplomat has said.. India’s PM Narendra Modi with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu in a car during his visit to Israel in February. (Photo: X/@narendramodi/ANI File). “The issue is not whether India should be ‘for’ or ‘against’ Israel, the United States, Iran, or the Gulf states in some emotional or ideological sense,” wrote Nirupama Menon Rao, former foreign secretary, on X.. “The issue is whether any of these relationships, as they are currently conducted, advance India’s long-term interests without narrowing India’s strategic autonomy,” she argued.. Follow | Live updates on the US-Iran conflict. Rao, who served as India’s envoy to the US, China and Sri Lanka during her career, opined that India’s strength has “always lain in balance — in keeping multiple relationships alive at once, in speaking across divides, and in refusing to let any one partnership become a trap”.. Also read | Jaishankar, Iran FM discuss Brics role in regional security amid West Asia conflict. She said that must not be seen as weakness: “It is the essence of serious statecraft for a country of India’s scale, geography, and civilizational depth.”. About “recent years”, she said, the tone of the domestic discourse has changed.. “There is a marked tendency to see Israel less as a partner than an object of admiration, even envy — a symbol of unapologetic force, swift retaliation, and the fantasy of unencumbered power. Much of the media has climbed aboard this train, cheering Israel less as a state with which India has specific interests than as a projection of their own ideological desires,” she argued.. Saying that’s where “the danger lies”, she further argued that admiration for Israeli military prowess cannot be seen as strategy. “It is emotional substitution… We cannot afford to inherit another country’s siege mentality as if it were our own doctrine.”. Also read | India, US close to critical minerals deal, big announcement expected soon: Envoy Sergio Gor. “The real test for India is not whether it can applaud force. It is whether it can preserve room for manoeuvre, protect its energy and maritime interests, maintain credibility across West Asia, and keep its own voice. A country like India should not suffer from ‘Israel envy’. It should have the confidence to be itself. I am sure it can,” she said.. India has sought to project the image of an equidistant votary of peace in the US-Iran conflict, even as PM Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel just ahead of the war breakout on February 28 was seen by the Opposition as a tacit pre-backing of the US and Israel.. PM Modi visited Israel on February 25–26, meeting with PM Benjamin Netanyahu and addressing a special session of the Knesset in Jerusalem, where he declared, “India stands with 

 India’s stance on the US-Israel attack on Iran, and the latter’s widening of the conflict to Arab countries and oil trade routes, need not be governed by “emotional” reasons, a top Indian ex-diplomat has said.. India’s PM Narendra Modi with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu in a car during his visit to Israel in February. (Photo: X/@narendramodi/ANI File). “The issue is not whether India should be ‘for’ or ‘against’ Israel, the United States, Iran, or the Gulf states in some emotional or ideological sense,” wrote Nirupama Menon Rao, former foreign secretary, on X.. “The issue is whether any of these relationships, as they are currently conducted, advance India’s long-term interests without narrowing India’s strategic autonomy,” she argued.. Follow | Live updates on the US-Iran conflict. Rao, who served as India’s envoy to the US, China and Sri Lanka during her career, opined that India’s strength has “always lain in balance — in keeping multiple relationships alive at once, in speaking across divides, and in refusing to let any one partnership become a trap”.. Also read | Jaishankar, Iran FM discuss Brics role in regional security amid West Asia conflict. She said that must not be seen as weakness: “It is the essence of serious statecraft for a country of India’s scale, geography, and civilizational depth.”. About “recent years”, she said, the tone of the domestic discourse has changed.. “There is a marked tendency to see Israel less as a partner than an object of admiration, even envy — a symbol of unapologetic force, swift retaliation, and the fantasy of unencumbered power. Much of the media has climbed aboard this train, cheering Israel less as a state with which India has specific interests than as a projection of their own ideological desires,” she argued.. Saying that’s where “the danger lies”, she further argued that admiration for Israeli military prowess cannot be seen as strategy. “It is emotional substitution… We cannot afford to inherit another country’s siege mentality as if it were our own doctrine.”. Also read | India, US close to critical minerals deal, big announcement expected soon: Envoy Sergio Gor. “The real test for India is not whether it can applaud force. It is whether it can preserve room for manoeuvre, protect its energy and maritime interests, maintain credibility across West Asia, and keep its own voice. A country like India should not suffer from ‘Israel envy’. It should have the confidence to be itself. I am sure it can,” she said.. India has sought to project the image of an equidistant votary of peace in the US-Iran conflict, even as PM Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel just ahead of the war breakout on February 28 was seen by the Opposition as a tacit pre-backing of the US and Israel.. PM Modi visited Israel on February 25–26, meeting with PM Benjamin Netanyahu and addressing a special session of the Knesset in Jerusalem, where he declared, “India stands with 

 India’s stance on the US-Israel attack on Iran, and the latter’s widening of the conflict to Arab countries and oil trade routes, need not be governed by “emotional” reasons, a top Indian ex-diplomat has said.. India’s PM Narendra Modi with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu in a car during his visit to Israel in February. (Photo: X/@narendramodi/ANI File). “The issue is not whether India should be ‘for’ or ‘against’ Israel, the United States, Iran, or the Gulf states in some emotional or ideological sense,” wrote Nirupama Menon Rao, former foreign secretary, on X.. “The issue is whether any of these relationships, as they are currently conducted, advance India’s long-term interests without narrowing India’s strategic autonomy,” she argued.. Follow | Live updates on the US-Iran conflict. Rao, who served as India’s envoy to the US, China and Sri Lanka during her career, opined that India’s strength has “always lain in balance — in keeping multiple relationships alive at once, in speaking across divides, and in refusing to let any one partnership become a trap”.. Also read | Jaishankar, Iran FM discuss Brics role in regional security amid West Asia conflict. She said that must not be seen as weakness: “It is the essence of serious statecraft for a country of India’s scale, geography, and civilizational depth.”. About “recent years”, she said, the tone of the domestic discourse has changed.. “There is a marked tendency to see Israel less as a partner than an object of admiration, even envy — a symbol of unapologetic force, swift retaliation, and the fantasy of unencumbered power. Much of the media has climbed aboard this train, cheering Israel less as a state with which India has specific interests than as a projection of their own ideological desires,” she argued.. Saying that’s where “the danger lies”, she further argued that admiration for Israeli military prowess cannot be seen as strategy. “It is emotional substitution… We cannot afford to inherit another country’s siege mentality as if it were our own doctrine.”. Also read | India, US close to critical minerals deal, big announcement expected soon: Envoy Sergio Gor. “The real test for India is not whether it can applaud force. It is whether it can preserve room for manoeuvre, protect its energy and maritime interests, maintain credibility across West Asia, and keep its own voice. A country like India should not suffer from ‘Israel envy’. It should have the confidence to be itself. I am sure it can,” she said.. India has sought to project the image of an equidistant votary of peace in the US-Iran conflict, even as PM Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel just ahead of the war breakout on February 28 was seen by the Opposition as a tacit pre-backing of the US and Israel.. PM Modi visited Israel on February 25–26, meeting with PM Benjamin Netanyahu and addressing a special session of the Knesset in Jerusalem, where he declared, “India stands with 

 India’s stance on the US-Israel attack on Iran, and the latter’s widening of the conflict to Arab countries and oil trade routes, need not be governed by “emotional” reasons, a top Indian ex-diplomat has said.. India’s PM Narendra Modi with Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu in a car during his visit to Israel in February. (Photo: X/@narendramodi/ANI File). “The issue is not whether India should be ‘for’ or ‘against’ Israel, the United States, Iran, or the Gulf states in some emotional or ideological sense,” wrote Nirupama Menon Rao, former foreign secretary, on X.. “The issue is whether any of these relationships, as they are currently conducted, advance India’s long-term interests without narrowing India’s strategic autonomy,” she argued.. Follow | Live updates on the US-Iran conflict. Rao, who served as India’s envoy to the US, China and Sri Lanka during her career, opined that India’s strength has “always lain in balance — in keeping multiple relationships alive at once, in speaking across divides, and in refusing to let any one partnership become a trap”.. Also read | Jaishankar, Iran FM discuss Brics role in regional security amid West Asia conflict. She said that must not be seen as weakness: “It is the essence of serious statecraft for a country of India’s scale, geography, and civilizational depth.”. About “recent years”, she said, the tone of the domestic discourse has changed.. “There is a marked tendency to see Israel less as a partner than an object of admiration, even envy — a symbol of unapologetic force, swift retaliation, and the fantasy of unencumbered power. Much of the media has climbed aboard this train, cheering Israel less as a state with which India has specific interests than as a projection of their own ideological desires,” she argued.. Saying that’s where “the danger lies”, she further argued that admiration for Israeli military prowess cannot be seen as strategy. “It is emotional substitution… We cannot afford to inherit another country’s siege mentality as if it were our own doctrine.”. Also read | India, US close to critical minerals deal, big announcement expected soon: Envoy Sergio Gor. “The real test for India is not whether it can applaud force. It is whether it can preserve room for manoeuvre, protect its energy and maritime interests, maintain credibility across West Asia, and keep its own voice. A country like India should not suffer from ‘Israel envy’. It should have the confidence to be itself. I am sure it can,” she said.. India has sought to project the image of an equidistant votary of peace in the US-Iran conflict, even as PM Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel just ahead of the war breakout on February 28 was seen by the Opposition as a tacit pre-backing of the US and Israel.. PM Modi visited Israel on February 25–26, meeting with PM Benjamin Netanyahu and addressing a special session of the Knesset in Jerusalem, where he declared, “India stands with