_107403437_gettyimages-659274918

Two years ago, Iran’s leader Rouhani addressed the UN General Assembly and warned the United States of America point blank to never engage in a raqs-e-shamsheer: a fatal dance of blades, with the Iranian nation. He warned through metaphor that the revocation of the Nuclear Deal, and America’s incessant belligerence, was a thin-edged dance of swords the world would no longer stomach.

As a new decade begins, the world holds its breath as America brandishes and swings a venal sword for a new movement in the dance with Iran, having assassinated Gen. Suleimani of the Quds Forces in Baghdad. Vengeance has been promised, and the world news media is awash in the panic of what is popularly, but recklessly being labelled “WW3.” For now, “tens” of rockets have been fired at US bases, and casualties have not resulted.

President Trump held a press conference which signalled détente, but tensions remain high, and both countries remain on the dance-floor of swinging blades. This is because many pressure groups continue to egg Trump on the warpath, including the leaders of foreign capitals. Among these, one group that has been particularly vociferous in its advocacy of an open conflict with Tehran is the military-industrial complex, notably the “defence” companies listed on the American S&P 500 Index.

The day after the murder of Suleimani was televised in America, the markets opened with defence company stocks soaring +5 per cent, outperforming the overall S&P 500 by hefty percentage points (the overall index was negative that day). Lockheed Martin (LMT) rose 3.6 per cent, Northrup Grumman (NOC) rose +5.6 per cent, and AeroVironmment (a drone-maker) rose +6.9 per cent.

These companies, which make the proverbial “swords” that the US brandishes, drool with the prospect of further military contracts, sustaining their vast budgets and long-term cashflows, and above all assuring heftier bonuses for the CEOs and other executives of the military-industrial complex. Indeed, a brazen conflict with Iran shall keep the values of their stocks high while uncertainties loom and investors seek a profitable haven against a rising tide of fear and havoc.

War-profiteering has enriched shareholders of defence companies on an ongoing basis since at least the Gulf War, with the intermittent lulls of peace in the Middle East often causing disappointment for defence executives. In fact, one of the most sadistic sermons one can ever listen to is the conference call of a major US defence company. Held by the investor relations department and the executives of each company, these conference calls indicate how the companies rejoice at the “new opportunities” that arise around the world, particularly in the Middle East, for “sustained visibility into our revenue stream” through sales that will be translated into the wanton destruction of complete societies.

Trump had promised to end previous wars launched by his “foolish” predecessors, including Iraq and Afghanistan, which left the defence lobbies with no bone to chew on. Renewed American violence in the region, now in the guise of strikes against Iran, indicates that Trump recognises the need to throw one of his staunchest support lobbies, the defence-contract multinationals, a juicy bone.

Despite some expressions of détente, a raqs-e-shamsheer has intensified, and these sword-makers now salivate at the prospect that, given Iraq and Afghanistan are winding down, some arena of blood can be found to keep the earnings per share high and the returns on equity even higher.

So in the dance of blades that ensues, it is the defence complex of late capitalism that will cheer the loudest at the spectacle of renewed violence.

–The writer is the Director for Economics and National Affairs at the Centre for Aerospace and Security Studies (CASS). This article was first published in The Nation newspaper. He can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The West: The History of an Idea

The world is witnessing the collapse of the Western order, if not the emergence of an alternative one. The idea of ‘West’ as against the rest is still at the root of contemporary understanding of world politics. Georgios Varouxakis, a remarkable voice on Modernity and Nationalism, has provided the historical origins and modern connotations attached with the idea of ‘West’. In his book ‘The West: The History of an Idea’, Varouxakis has argued that the West is not an eternal entity, rather it is a modern socio-political construct that emerged in the political philosophy of the early 19th century and evolved with the passage of time. The book provides an in-depth historical analysis of the idea to determine the roots of its modern interpretation.

Read More »

Space-Enabled Warfare in the 21st Century: Pathways for Developing States

Space has emerged as a distinct domain of warfare alongside land, sea, air, and cyber. Developed countries like the United States, Russia, and China possess offensive and support capabilities in space. In the shadowed expanse of Low Earth Orbit (LEO), where satellites operate like silent custodians, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine transformed the nature of modern conflict. As Russian troops marched forward, the commercial satellites like Maxar and Planet, which are operated by Western firms, captured high-resolution imagery of Russian troops, providing real-time intelligence to Ukrainian commanders, unlike ever before.

Read More »

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »