There is no doubt that the Iranian regime finds itself in an existential crisis unlike any it has faced since the 1979 Khomeini Revolution. This crisis surpasses even the eight-year war against Saddam Hussein's regime. With Israel's intense military strikes targeting Iran's proxies in the Middle East, the pressing question is: Can the Iranian regime navigate this crisis with minimal losses, or is its future at risk?
To answer this, we must consider several key factors. Prior to terror Hamas' bloody attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, Iran held a strong negotiating position. Western, particularly US, efforts were focused on "appeasing" Iran to resume compliance with the nuclear agreement. Iran also benefited from the Russia-Ukraine war, supplying drones to Russia, which allowed it to showcase its military capabilities, especially its advanced drone technology.
However, the Iranian regime appears to have misread the conflict between the Hamas terror group and Israel. It saw Israel's failure to quickly defeat Hamas as a sign of its own military strength. This was a strategic miscalculation, ignoring the complexities of asymmetric warfare. Iran's Revolutionary Guards may have drawn misguided parallels from the US withdrawal from Afghanistan and Israel's 2006 war in Lebanon, hoping to replicate similar outcomes by using Hamas's terrorist attacks inside Israel, backed by Iranian forces in Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen.
A critical turning point could be the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, which would have far-reaching consequences for Iran. Such an event would impact Iran more than the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh due to sectarian factors and Nasrallah's importance to Iran's regional strategy. Iranian leaders might feel personally threatened, not just because of Nasrallah's strategic value but also due to the method of the assassination.
Israel sent a clear and direct message to the Iranian regime's leaders that it can reach them in a similar manner, including the potential to target highly fortified Iranian nuclear facilities. The bombs that hit Nasrallah's headquarters penetrated tens of meters underground. Hezbollah's leader was not killed directly by the Israeli bombardment of about 85 bombs, each weighing around a ton, but by the destruction of approximately eight underground floors, along with six additional floors above ground.
The intelligence infiltration and assassination of Hezbollah leaders, notably Nasrallah, was a shocking blow to Iran. It placed the regime in an unprecedentedly vulnerable position, both internally and externally. For the first time, Iran was unable to fall back on its usual "strategic patience" due to the magnitude of the event, which severely damaged its national pride. In response, Iran launched a missile attack on Israel – a move seen as necessary to maintain the regime's image amid growing foreign and domestic contempt.
This missile strike temporarily breathed life back into the regime. Now, Iran is desperately trying to avoid an Israeli retaliation, which could involve strikes on its nuclear facilities or the assassination of key figures like Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei or Revolutionary Guards commanders. Any such retaliation would force Iran into a direct military conflict, something it seeks to avoid at all costs.
Israel has now exposed the Iranian regime's proxy strategy, pushing Tehran to either engage directly in military conflict or face undesirable outcomes. This situation presents the Iranian regime with two unfavorable scenarios.
The first scenario is to confront Israel directly, trying to minimize the consequences and avoid heavy losses. The outcome will depend on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's decision – whether to strike a decisive blow to the regime or merely weaken and disarm it.
The second scenario is to pursue diplomatic channels with the US, hoping to convince Israel not to retaliate for Iran's recent attack in exchange for Iranian promises to restrain its proxies, disarm them, and scale back its proxy warfare strategy. This could be part of a broader agreement that includes the Iranian nuclear program. However, this option is unlikely, as the Biden administration and Israel, given Israel's current strategic advantage, would probably reject such a deal.
There is strong momentum to seize the opportunity to neutralize the Iranian threat without conceding to Iran's nuclear ambitions, which remain a core issue in the conflict with both the US and Israel.
