India, June 21 -- The Iran-Israel clashes have reached a breakpoint with the prospect of the US entering the fray. On Thursday, a White House spokesperson said President Donald Trump would take the call on this "within the next two weeks" though many analysts expect Washington to bomb Fordow, Iran's nuclear facility, which appears to be beyond the reach of Tel Aviv, very soon, perhaps even the weekend. Parallelly, the foreign ministers of Germany, France, Britain and the European Union are talking with Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi to explore a ceasefire. Europe, though, has been reduced to a marginal player since Trump in 2018 ended a deal that was negotiated with Tehran in 2015. It is clear Trump holds the keys to what threatens to become a wider conflict and reshape power relations in West Asia. As it launched the attack on Iran last weekend, Israel cited the International Atomic Energy Agency's censure of Tehran for failing to provide information about undeclared nuclear material and activities at multiple locations. Since then, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has widened his goals to a regime change in Tehran and the elimination of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Reports suggested that the US vetoed the move. Iran, meanwhile, has warned that it will retaliate if the US becomes an active participant in the conflict. President Trump doesn't like wars; during the campaign, he promised to cease America's participation in global conflicts and work to negotiate peace in Ukraine and Gaza. Trump's peace efforts in both are in shambles and he now has to deal with Iran, not a scenario he planned for. A reasonable achievement for him will be to negotiate a rollback of Iran's nuclear plans and end the conflict. That will enhance his credentials as a peacemaker and reaffirm the US's pre-eminence as a global power, especially since this round of conflict in West Asia has exposed the limits of Chinese and Russian influence in the region: Despite being allies of Tehran, Moscow and Beijing have restricted their involvement in the conflict to statements condemning Tel Aviv's actions. Israel may have to be satisfied with a diminished Iran and its reiteration as the region's unquestioned hegemon. However, if Tel Aviv and Washington pursue an endgame that stops only with regime change in Tehran, it may lead to tumultuous changes in the region. First, the Ayatollah is the face of the Islamist regime that captured office in Tehran in 1979 when mass mobilisations forced the Shah of Iran, backed by the West, to abdicate. The Islamists have been challenged by street protests in recent years, but these sections may not necessarily back a regime change orchestrated by the US and Israel. People tend to rally around the flag in times of war. Second, lessons from Iraq suggest that change forced by outside forces can lead to anarchy. Iran is a civilisational State, but its theocratic regime is the glue that holds together multiple regions and ethnicities. Three, Iran's mostly Sunni neighbourhood has perceived the Shia State as a regional hegemon and will surely prefer a weakened Tehran. But it is another matter if they want an unstable Iran in their backyard. In the short run, chaos in West Asia will lead to a spike in oil prices, impact global trade, and slow down the world economy. India has major stakes in West Asia - Iran is a key trading partner and a port of entry to Central Asia, and the Gulf nations are crucial for Delhi's fuel needs and house a large expat population - and uncertainty in the region complicates its economic goals and power ambitions....