As the second month of the US-Israeli war against Iran begins, the conflict can be summed up in two words: psychological attrition.
In other words, unlike a conventional war of attrition in which both sides grind each other down militarily until one breaks, here the balance of power is clear. In physical terms, the damage Iran is inflicting on the Americans, the Gulf states or Israel is minimal. By contrast, Iran itself is sustaining extremely heavy blows. Its economy was already shattered before the campaign began. Its military capabilities are being stripped away hour by hour. Its leaders and commanders have been sent to the next world.
That means the pace at which it is harming Israel and other countries in the region is negligible compared with what it had planned. Unlike Iran, those countries are, by and large, continuing to function, while the disruption to daily life caused by missiles and drones remains relatively limited. In terms of the raw balance of power, the war is therefore almost one-sided.
Lacking the ability to defeat its enemies, or even to inflict meaningful pain on them, Iran has two effective tools left. One is closing the Strait of Hormuz. That would damage Trump's prestige and shake the global economy. The second tool, which is tied to the first and has been somewhat more successful from Iran's perspective, is psychology. That means projecting the sense that regardless of the price, this regime will never break. Supposedly.
More missiles, fewer barrages
Iran was clearly prepared for this scenario. Yet the very "increase in missiles" fired at Israel during the first days of Passover points to its weakness. Instead of the 8 to 15 missiles it had been firing on routine days of the war, on the day it made a special effort Iran came close to 20 missiles in total. It also changed its tactic, firing more missiles but in fewer barrages. This updated version was also intended mainly to achieve a psychological effect.
So what have we learned? That Iran is managing its munitions carefully with the aim of prolonging the war. That it is capable of increasing the pace when it chooses. But, and this is a big but, that increase is significant in terms of public perception and minor in terms of reality. Yes, it is unpleasant to run to a safe room so many times during a holiday. Still, even when Iran really wanted to intensify its attack, it caused only somewhat more damage than usual, but no fatalities. Thank God.
So, as noted, the name of the game is psychological attrition on our side while Iran is being worn down physically. Through useful idiots and actual agents it has in Israel or elsewhere in the world, Iran is trying to create the impression that the cost of the war is unbearable. But what is worse: gasoline at $4 a gallon, or Iran with an arsenal of intercontinental nuclear missiles? What is harder: running to a shelter nonstop, or a strangulation ring that would destroy the Jewish state? What poses a greater threat to the world: a short-term recession, or a deranged regime operating an ocean of drones in the Strait of Hormuz, terrorist cells across the planet, and seeking to impose Shiite belief on humanity by force?
It knows the West's weak points
In cold calculation, the answers are obvious. But Iran knows the West's weak points, its short-sightedness, short patience and short time horizon, through which elites in those countries judge success and failure. It knows those questions will not be asked in many television studios and many academic institutions. That is precisely where it is pressing and building its strategy.
The madmen in Tehran know that in the West, people will talk about one American aircraft being shot down a thousand times more than they will about dozens of Iranian aircraft destroyed, hundreds of missiles intercepted and thousands of drones thwarted. That is the asymmetric psychological war they are hoping for, and through it, want to win.
The butchers in Tehran are hoping that the psychological effect will work on Donald Trump. He does, in fact, want to end the war. Trump has said so publicly in fairly clear terms. Anyone who meets him is also gathers that he is looking for an exit strategy, but one that will make clear to the world who won, not only in the real world but in the realm of image as well.
There is reason to believe him when he says the coming days will be critical.
