If we all close our eyes and think of the word ‘war’ I can bet that most of us wouldn’t associate it with ‘success,’ ‘winning’ or even ‘essential.’ We would describe it in more vile terms, or, by its textbook definition: “a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states or nations.”
At Cornell University, discussions around global issues often take place in classrooms, where they're analyzed and turned into policy ideas. However, the current situation between Iran and the United States is too complex for simplification. It goes beyond politics; it's about real people, power dynamics and the tangible consequences that are unfolding before our eyes.
Since Feb. 28, tensions have boiled over into open conflict, with the U.S. and its allies launching strikes to weaken Iran’s military and even aiming for regime change. Meanwhile, Iran has been rocked by massive internal protests, some of the largest seen since 1979, which have faced severe crackdowns, resulting in thousands of deaths. Recently, an unexpected ceasefire has put a temporary halt to the fighting, but there's still plenty of uncertainty, as both sides declare victory while negotiations remain ongoing.
From a policy perspective, the U.S. has primarily focused on using sanctions and military pressure in its response. The goal of these sanctions is to weaken Iran’s economy and curb its nuclear ambitions. However, the actual impact of these measures isn’t as clear-cut. One could even point out that these policies often end up hurting regular civilians more than they do the political elite. For example, despite years of sanctions aimed at pressuring Iran's leadership, recent reports indicate that everyday Iranians are struggling with high unemployment, the collapse of their currency and shortages of essential goods. Meanwhile, the ruling authorities have largely remained in control. According to Reuters, after the latest conflict, civilians are facing skyrocketing costs and job losses, while the government and its officials continue to hold their positions.
This brings us to one of the toughest issues we tackle at the Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy: How can governments strike a balance between respecting a country's sovereignty and their duty to address human rights violations? Ideally, countries would avoid meddling in each other's domestic matters. However, turning a blind eye to serious abuses can make it seem like other governments are complicit due to inaction. On the flip side, intervening, especially with military force, can lead to escalation, instability and unforeseen consequences.
There’s no straightforward solution here; it’s all about making trade-offs. Personally, I can’t support what’s happening, whether it’s the violence against civilians in Iran or the notion that military intervention is a viable or ethical answer, so making those trade-offs is particularly challenging. As someone who is from Tbilisi, Georgia, a country which consistently faces ongoing fear and challenges from Russia, I know what it is like to fear for the safety and security for my loved ones, for the security of my country having its own identity. Seeing these events unfold makes it painfully clear that the decisions made by nations’ leaders have repercussions that hit everyday people hard, sometimes in truly devastating ways.
At Cornell, especially in Brooks, we learn to think critically by balancing costs, benefits and probabilities. However, situations like the war in Iran require more than just analytical thought. They call for empathy, humility and a recognition that policy goes beyond theory.
For many students, studying Iran isn't just about shaping future career goals; it's about shaping who they are. It challenges aspiring policymakers to acknowledge the limits of their own perspectives and the reality that even well-intentioned policies can have negative consequences.
That's why discussions on this campus are so important. Universities shouldn't only focus on creating policy analysts; they should also highlight the voices of those impacted. Hearing from Iranian students doesn't directly fix the crisis, but it could help anchor the issue in reality. These perspectives allow us to witness policy through an emotional lens rather than factual. During times like this, it's important to be brought back to the reality of what war really means.
Iran is more than just a foreign policy topic. It's a challenge that reflects our thinking, our values and the kinds of policymakers we want to be.
The Cornell Daily Sun is interested in publishing a broad and diverse set of content from the Cornell and greater Ithaca community. We want to hear what you have to say about this topic or any of our pieces. Here are some guidelines on how to submit. And here’s our email: associate-editor@cornellsun.com.
Lali Tobin MPA '27 is an Opinion Columnist and a master's student at the Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy. Her monthly column, The Tobin Times, explores public policy and politics through different lenses. She hopes to engage readers in hearing how politics is the most discussed topic in the media and why it is important to stay on top of current issues. She also hopes to tackle current social trends that can be connected through public policy. She can be reached at ltobin@cornellsun.com.
