Has Iran's new war strategy put the United States in danger?
When Israel and the United States launched their joint operation in Iran, their main goal was to bring about a rapid change in the regime in Tehran. This goal may still exist on paper. However, recent messages from Washington indicate that they are now having to make a new calculation by moving away from their previous position to some extent.
The situation on the ground shows that the kind of public anger or unrest that was thought to cause the collapse of the Iranian regime did not actually happen. On the contrary, the war has spread to new areas in four days. Instead of collapsing, Iran's Islamic regime is also quite stable. Not only that, but the country is also striking back at various positions of the enemy.
This situation is forcing Israel and the United States to recalculate their previous calculations. In particular, all their previous assumptions about the possibility of regime change in Iran and Tehran's acceptance of the offer of talks are now under question. And after the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Tehran also sees no possibility of talks.
Meanwhile, Iran is not responding at all to the diplomatic activities of regional countries. In addition, the country is also openly threatening countries where US bases and military installations are located. This is not just stubbornness or ideological rigidity, but a reflection of a well-thought-out strategy of Tehran. Tehran believes that any agreement or ceasefire without a structural change in the conflict situation will give the enemy the opportunity to launch a bigger attack in the future.
Two realities have fueled this concern. First, the US administration itself has acknowledged that the war may not be short-lived or limited. At the Pentagon, General Dan Kaine, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, said, “There is a risk of additional casualties.”
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has tried to allay fears, saying, “This is not Iraq, this is not an endless war.” But this tendency to deny the possibility of an “endless” situation proves that the issue of a prolonged war has now become part of the public discourse.
The same tone is also found in the voice of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The repetition of this statement largely reflects the joint efforts of the US and Israel to alleviate growing concerns, because the initial “shock and awe” phase of their operation has not yielded the expected success.
In addition, Secretary of State Marco Rubio has admitted that the US administration knew in advance that Israel would attack Iran and that Iran would “attack the United States in response.” After this admission, he has broadened the scope of the operation, rather than reducing it. Rubio said that the US now wants to completely eliminate Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities. “We have specific goals and we will do whatever it takes to achieve those goals,” he said.
Rubio’s renewed emphasis on ballistic missiles brings to the fore the same point that Hegseth made about the lack of a plan for “state reconstruction” or regime change in Iran. It makes it clear that the US and Israel are still far from achieving their primary strategic goals.
Despite the hype of strategic successes or exaggerated casualty figures to maintain the momentum of the war, the current situation has created pressure to find a new way out.
Israel has long argued that regime change in Iran will ultimately require a ground operation.
Against this backdrop, using Iran’s opposition and Kurdish groups as strategic tools appears to be part of Washington’s plan. When Rubio said, “We are not in a position to launch a ground operation right now. But the president has options. He is not ruling out any possibility,” it suggests that the United States is preparing to take greater risks and possibly engage in a protracted war to make up for the initial strategic deficit.
This framework is as much a product of Israeli-US miscalculations as it is a result of Iran’s own strategic shift.
Instead of launching occasional large-scale missile strikes on Israel, Iran has now decided to launch long-term, scattered strikes to wear down its defenses. As unexpected as Iran's strategy was, so too was the initial 'decapitation strike' targeting Khamenei.
Post a Comment