The Axis of Resistance’s Blueprint for Decolonisation

Understanding the true essence of the current conflict in South West Asia requires grasping the geopolitical ambition of the Axis of Resistance, which aims for decolonisation and ‘the end of the colonial era’.

This process of decolonisation is only completed by uprooting the usurping entity as a settler colony and dismantling its ‘Siamese twins’ – the dynastic entities and sheikhdoms planted by colonialism in the Arabian Peninsula to safeguard its interests.

The geopolitical premise: decolonisation

Anyone who imagines that this historical objective of decolonisation can be achieved easily, quickly, or without a heavy price, is ignorant of historical and contemporary realities.

We are effectively discussing the undermining of a millennium-old empire, the roots of which trace back to 1095, when Pope Urban II called for the First Crusade.

This crusade established settler colonies on the eastern Mediterranean coast, forming the foundation for the second colonial phase at the end of the 15th century, which persists in various forms today.

The three-front strategy

The Axis of Resistance wages its battle on three integrated fronts:

• The Military Front: Focuses on seizing control of strategic straits – Hormuz first and Bab al-Mandab second – to exert total control over energy flows and vital derivatives (such as chemical fertilisers, helium, and sulphuric acid) from the Arabian Peninsula. This positions the Axis as the primary player in the global economy.
• The Economic Front: Utilises a mechanism of ‘precision calibration’ of supply flows to trigger structural socio-economic crises in target nations, specifically Western systems. This policy of ‘selective strangulation’ targets the economic stability and livelihoods of Western societies.
• The Psychological Front: Aims to inflict the necessary pain on the adversary to impose a new geopolitical reality. It seeks to force global societies and political leaderships to accept the demise of the old order.

Unlike previous wars (such as Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, or Ukraine), the majority of humanity will not merely watch from behind screens. Instead, they will feel the direct consequences in their daily lives – a necessary step towards the acceptance of this major geopolitical shift.

The time factor and the necessity of steadfastness

Time is the most fundamental element in this war, with its rhythm controlled by the intensity of field escalation and the pace of energy flow.

Strategically, this confrontation must continue until it achieves:

1. A collapse of Western stock markets exceeding 70%.
2. Inflation rates surpassing 15%.
3. The imposition of forced energy and food rationing in Western countries.

These scenarios are unlikely to mature before the winter season of 2026–2027. Discussions of a ceasefire or ‘peace’ are merely public-relations manoeuvres to manage time and present the Axis as a seeker of stability to its people and allies.

Imperial erosion vs. Axis deepening

Doubting the Axis’s ability to withstand the ‘Empire’ is a form of intellectual folly.

If Gaza – with its limited area and suffocating siege – has stood firm for over two years, the Axis, with its expansive bases, can endure for decades. Conversely, the Empire’s ability to persist is questioned due to:

• Strategic Failure: The Western military system has proven incapable, trapped in a ’20th-century mindset’ while the Axis wages a ’21st-century war’.
• Industrial Base Erosion: Western armies lack the industrial capacity required for wars of attrition.
• Depleted Reserves: There is an acute exhaustion of air defence and, more importantly, long-range offensive missiles like TOMAHAWK and JASSM-ER.
• Structural Crises: Worsening economic and political problems within the Empire’s entities, from America and Europe to the usurping entity.

Strategic Balance of Power: Reflections on Phase One

The first phase of this confrontation has revealed a radical shift in global military doctrine.

Analysts acknowledge the superiority of Iran’s ‘Hybrid Warfare Strategy‘ over the structural flaws of the US strategy, which appeared prepared for a war of the past.

1. The Winners’ Camp

• Iran: Achieved ‘comprehensive deterrence’ by neutralising US air and naval power. Its precision missiles shattered the myth of Western technical superiority. Economically, it leveraged high oil revenues and imposed ‘procedural sovereignty’ over the Strait of Hormuz. Politically, it became a global hub, with countries like France, Italy, Japan, and India seeking direct channels with Tehran.
• China: US failures against Iran confirmed the validity of Beijing’s strategy in East Asia, rendering US bases a strategic burden. Guaranteed energy security from Iran provides Chinese industry with a competitive edge over European and Asian rivals.
• Russia: The depletion of Western missile stocks in the south weakened support for Ukraine and curbed NATO’s recklessness against Moscow. Russia has converted global energy shortages into direct political influence over European capitals.

2. The Impacted Camp

• The US and the West: Suffered the fall of military prestige alongside an economic earthquake of runaway inflation and unemployment.
• The Zionist Entity and Functional Sheikhdoms: The US-guaranteed security umbrella has collapsed, leaving the Zionist entity isolated and militarily deficient. For the dynastic sheikhdoms, they have lost their role as ‘rhythm keepers’ of the energy markets, becoming marginal players facing heavy economic losses.

Conclusion

The balance of steadfastness tilts towards those with the stamina and capacity for military and political innovation.

While the Empire suffers from strategic obsolescence and industrial decay, the Axis is seizing its sovereignty by controlling the artery of energy. The question is no longer ‘Will geopolitical change occur?’ but rather ‘When will economic collapses and social crises force the West to accept its defeat and recognise the new reality in South West Asia?’