On the twelfth day of hostilities between Israel and US-backed Iran, debates are intensifying in Washington and Tel Aviv over the outcomes of operations and their political prospects. Conflicting statements about the weakening of Iran's military capabilities on the one hand, and continuing waves of rocket and drone attacks on Israel on the other, create what observers call a "strategic uncertainty" in managing the conflict. This uncertainty is drawing criticism within the US and calling into question the campaign's ability to achieve its political objectives.
On the battlefield the picture looks more complicated than official statements. Despite Israel's claims of destroying launch sites and reducing Iran's potential, in recent hours there have been reports of an increase in the frequency of Iranian rocket barrages. Experts note that such pressure puts the Israeli narrative to a severe test. The continuation of attacks indicates that Iran may still retain the ability to control the rhythm of the battle despite the strikes it has suffered.
The political and strategic situation remains extremely complex. Analysts describe Israeli rhetoric as often "marketing-driven," designed to reassure a domestic audience with the image of a quick victory. However, the return of escalation reflects Tehran's readiness for a protracted war, which keeps Israel's rear under strain and puts the government in a difficult position regarding the achievement of its ambitious goals. In addition, the conflict is reigniting debates over Iran's nuclear program and ballistic missiles.
Economic pressure on Israel is mounting. The government approved an additional security budget of 30 billion shekels, while the economy is estimated to be losing about $3 billion a week due to disruptions across broad sectors. With the finance ministry planning cuts to other departments' budgets and growing inflation risks, serious doubts are emerging about the economy's ability to withstand a prolonged war, adding domestic challenges to the military effort.
Ultimately, the ability to achieve both military and political goals largely depends on Washington's calculations and the skill of converting tactical pressure into sustainable political results. Experts acknowledge that the campaign has degraded some of Iran's conventional military capabilities but warn of the difficulties in turning these tactical successes into a clear political achievement, especially given new Iranian leadership that is reluctant to engage in dialogue with the US.
Comments on the News
What are the main components of Iran's nuclear program and why is it a persistent subject of international debate and sanctions? - The main components include uranium enrichment (including up to 60%), the heavy-water reactor in Arak, stocks of low-enriched uranium, and centrifuges. The program provokes debate because Iran insists it is peaceful, while Western countries and the IAEA express concern about a possible military dimension. Sanctions are imposed due to Iran's non-compliance with limits under the nuclear deal (JCPOA) after the US withdrawal from the agreement in 2018.
Who makes up the "new Iranian leadership" mentioned in the article, and what ideological or political positions make it less inclined to engage with the US compared with previous administrations? - The "new leadership" refers to the conservative principalist camp headed by President Ebrahim Raisi, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, and the dominance of conservatives in the parliament and the Expediency Discernment Council. Their ideology is based on a "resistance economy," anti-Americanism, and skepticism about negotiations with the West, making them less flexible than the previous reformist government of Hassan Rouhani, which concluded the 2015 nuclear deal.
What is meant by Iran's "conventional military capabilities," and how are they structured within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the regular army? - "Conventional military capabilities" include missile forces (ballistic and cruise missiles), drones, air defense systems, naval forces, and asymmetric capabilities. They are structured as follows: the regular army (Artesh) is responsible for traditional border defense, while the IRGC (an elite parallel structure) controls the missile forces, special operations forces (Quds Force), Basij (militia), and is responsible for regional operations and the regime's ideological security.
Full version: غموض إستراتيجي.. هل تعثرت أهداف أمريكا وإسرائيل في إيران؟