Despite optimistic statements by U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu about an approaching "endgame" in the confrontation with Iran, analytical reports, including Alex Croft’s piece in The Independent, indicate a more complex reality. Experts emphasize that Iran retains significant capacity for retaliatory actions despite intensive strikes on its military infrastructure. Severe damage has not deprived Tehran of reserve capabilities nor stopped continuous drone production, which means it maintains key asymmetric advantages.
Iran’s strategic resilience is based on several factors: large missile stockpiles, the ability to produce inexpensive unmanned aerial vehicles, and a willingness to wage a protracted conflict that Tehran views as a "marathon" rather than a short clash. To compensate for the military gap with its adversaries, Iran employs unconventional strategies, including pressure on the global economy through threats to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz and by expanding the confrontation to a regional scale. A decentralized command structure ensures operational continuity even if top leadership is eliminated.
The military dynamics show that Iran is effectively fighting on two fronts: in direct confrontation with the United States, which seeks to undermine its military capabilities, and in a covert struggle with Israel, which uses targeted killings to destabilize the regime. This dispersal across different theaters of operations greatly complicates forecasts of a swift end to the conflict. Moreover, there is a clear gap between U.S.–Israeli assessments of the situation and the strategic reality, where even partial achievement of military objectives does not guarantee a clear "victory," leaving an outcome of weakening but not eliminating Iran’s regional role.
Within the United States, serious disagreements over continuing the conflict are growing, reflected in resignations of key figures such as head of counterterrorism intelligence Joe Kent, and in open criticism from parts of the political establishment. Some officials believe the Trump administration was drawn into an "Israeli plot," while right-wing MAGA activists and some Democrats have begun to question the need for the war and the circles supporting it. These internal contradictions make developing a clear exit strategy or achieving long-term political consensus extremely difficult.
Politically, relations between Trump and Netanyahu continue to shape the form of American intervention, but each side has its own agenda: Israel maintains its own logic of action, and Iran has strategies that allow it to draw the U.S. back into the conflict. As The Times analysis notes, although Trump retains a certain degree of control over the conduct of the war, he is no longer the sole author of decisions, which makes a complete American withdrawal a complex, multi-stage process. Thus, a "clean" and rapid end to the conflict seems unlikely, creating significant political and economic challenges in both the near and medium term.
Comments on the news
How is the decentralized command structure arranged in Iran’s armed forces and security services, and which specific organizations (for example, the IRGC) are included in it? - Iran has parallel military structures: the regular army (Artesh) and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which both ultimately answer to the Supreme Leader. The IRGC includes ground forces, aerospace forces, the Quds Force (special operations/external operations), the Basij (militia), and intelligence. There are also the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (VEVAK) and the police. This decentralization creates multiple centers of power and operational autonomy.
What specific economic and strategic role does the Strait of Hormuz play for Iran and the global economy, beyond the mentioned threat of its closure? - The Strait of Hormuz is a critical route for 20–30% of the world’s oil and liquefied gas. For Iran it is the main export corridor for about 90% of its oil, a key source of revenues, and a lever of geopolitical influence. Strategically, it allows Iran to control energy flows, affect oil prices, and serves as a point of deterrence against regional rivals and Western powers.
Through which specific proxy forces or regional allies does Iran traditionally expand the scale of confrontation, implementing its "unconventional strategies"? - Iran uses a network of proxy forces: Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shiite militias in Iraq (for example, the Popular Mobilization Forces, Hashd al-Shaabi), the Houthis in Yemen (Ansar Allah), and groups in Syria (supporting the Assad government). Allies include Syria and, to some extent, Qatar. These forces allow Iran to project influence while minimizing direct military involvement and creating "strategic depth."
Full version: تصريحات أمريكية إسرائيلية عن "نهاية اللعبة" وإيران تستعد لمعركة طويلة