By TENGKU NOOR SHAMSIAH TENGKU ABDULLAH
KUALA LUMPUR, June 23 – The US-Iran accord was intended to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and bring months of conflict to an end. However, renewed uncertainty over the status of the strategic waterway almost immediately raised questions about the durability of the agreement and highlighted a broader geopolitical reality: the conflict may have accelerated the shift towards a more multipolar world order.
That is the view of Dr Shahreen Madros, Adjunct Professor at the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Graduate School of Business (UKM-GSB), who cautioned that the agreement should be viewed with cautious optimism rather than outright celebration.
How the Conflict Began and Why the Accord Matters
According to Dr Shahreen’s assessment, the conflict and subsequent agreement have become significant markers in the evolving global balance of power.
The June 17 memorandum of understanding between Washington and Tehran provided for a cessation of hostilities, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to commercial shipping, the lifting of the US naval blockade, and a 60-day period to negotiate a more comprehensive settlement.
However, the agreement remains a framework rather than a final settlement. Key issues, including the future management of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s nuclear programme, sanctions relief and broader regional security arrangements, remain unresolved and are expected to form the basis of future negotiations.
Fragility Exposed
Questions surrounding the durability of the accord emerged almost immediately.
Conflicting statements regarding the operational status of the Strait of Hormuz underscored the uncertainty surrounding the agreement’s implementation. While Iranian military authorities signalled renewed restrictions, US officials maintained that the waterway remained open to commercial traffic.
For Dr Shahreen, these developments reinforced the need for caution.
The international community, he noted, has witnessed numerous ceasefires and peace initiatives falter before achieving lasting stability. As a result, optimism remains tempered by concerns over economic disruption and geopolitical uncertainty. Reflecting on the conflict, he argued that it produced few clear strategic breakthroughs for the parties that initiated military action.
“There’s nothing much had been achieved from the war. Nothing can be said about any breakthroughs from the aggressors,” he said.
A Demonstration of Power That Fell Short
Dr Shahreen argued that the conflict appeared to serve as a demonstration of power by an established global actor seeking to reinforce its influence amid growing strategic competition.
However, he contended that the campaign failed to deliver the decisive outcomes required to strengthen that position.
“The attempt to demonstrate old power has only backfired,” he said.
He suggested that Iran and its regional allies emerged with greater confidence, while some traditional Western partners appeared increasingly reluctant to align themselves fully with Washington’s approach.
The differing responses among European countries, he noted, reflected broader questions about the future cohesion of long-standing alliances.
Country Versus Personality
Dr Shahreen stressed the importance of distinguishing between the long-term interests of a nation and the policies of individual political leaders.
The strategic competition between major powers, he said, predates any single administration and is rooted in deeper structural dynamics. While leadership styles may influence the pace and tone of geopolitical developments, the broader competition is likely to continue regardless of changes in government.
Asked whether future political changes in Washington could improve relations with traditional allies, he replied: “I think so.”
He urged observers to focus on underlying economic and geopolitical realities rather than short-term political developments.
China, in his view, will remain pragmatic.
“China is in for the long haul,” he said, describing a country that need not alter its conduct so much as continue extending a hand to developing economies, a policy of helping others grow in order to grow itself that has been in place for decades. Acceptance, on this reading, is won by making more friends rather than enemies.
A More Diffuse Global Order
According to Dr Shahreen, the broader trend is the gradual diffusion of global power, accelerated by technological advancement and wider access to information.
The democratisation of knowledge creates opportunities for countries willing to adapt and innovate, but it also risks widening disparities between those that successfully develop their capabilities and those that fall behind.
He suggested that the defining divide of the future may increasingly be between those able to harness these opportunities and those unable to do so.
He also acknowledged the limitations of collective action within ASEAN, noting that member states frequently pursue their own national interests when responding to major geopolitical and economic challenges.
Malaysia’s Opportunity
Despite the uncertainties, Dr Shahreen believes Malaysia is well positioned to play a constructive role in an increasingly fragmented international environment.
Its reputation as a neutral and trading-oriented nation, combined with its multicultural and multireligious character, provides opportunities to engage both developed and developing economies while maintaining strong ties across the Muslim world.
“If we play it right,” he said, Malaysia can continue serving as a bridge between different regions, cultures and economic blocs.
Whether the US-Iran accord is ultimately remembered as a temporary ceasefire or the beginning of a broader geopolitical transformation remains uncertain. For Dr Shahreen, however, the episode should be viewed as part of a larger historical process that is reshaping the international order and redefining how power is distributed in the 21st century.
- TNS NEWS