Strategic Objectives

Assessing the processes and positions of the Zionist regime and the US in their war on Iran indicates their strategic objectives in attacking Iran.

Tel Aviv Objectives

• Obliterating or weakening Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat;
• Weakening Iran’s military strength, particularly its ballistic missiles (estimated to have 3,000 missiles) ;
• Destabilizing or changing the Islamic Republic establishment to remove long-term threats;
• Bolstering regional deterrence against Iran-allied resistance groups; and
• Maintaining the US military and diplomatic support.

US objectives

• Preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons without widespread military conflict;
• Undermining the regional influence of Iran and its proxy groups;
• Preserving ties with Persian Gulf allies and Tel Aviv without provoking any extended conflict;
• Maintaining the stability of oil markets and global supply chains, particularly the Strait of Hormuz; and
• Preventing endless wars in the Middle East, as promised by President Donald Trump.

Iran War Scenarios

Based on the above-mentioned objectives, at least three scenarios may be envisaged for Tel Aviv and Washington in the war on Iran:

1. Downfall of the Islamic Republic

In this scenario, the Zionist regime was expecting to undermine the Islamic Republic by targeting the assassination of top military commanders and political leaders, and touch off protests across the country due to the economic pressure from sanctions to facilitate the overthrow of the Islamic establishment in Iran. In the eyes of the Tel Aviv regime, unrest similar to the 2022 protests would bring the Islamic Republic closer to downfall, this time aided by military and economic damage, in which case a new government with no hostility to Tel Aviv and Washington would take power or a destabilizing power void would occur to blunt Iran’s regional influence.

2. Irreparable Damage to Infrastructure

In this scenario, the Zionist regime expected to benefit from US logistics or arms support in launching widespread strikes on Iran’s vital infrastructure, including Natanz and Fordow nuclear facilities, missile bases, oil refineries, the South Pars gas field, and the power network. Tel Aviv hoped to undermine Iran’s economy and military strength by assassinating military commanders so that post-war Iran would be forced to focus on reconstruction without having any military or economic power to counter the US and the Zionist regime for years. That would have set back Iran’s nuclear program while reducing Iran’s regional influence. Under this scenario, the Islamic Republic would be left as a bankrupt and ineffective government. This scenario failed due to Iran’s precision strikes as the Tel Aviv regime realized that should Iran’s economic infrastructure come under attack, it would face tougher reciprocal strikes.

3. Diplomatic Ceasefire

In this scenario, the Zionist regime expected to inflict heavy damage on Iran’s nuclear and missile installations before stopping its strikes under diplomatic pressure from other governments and due to damage caused by Iran’s reciprocal strikes. The Zionist regime and the US hope that Iran would return to the negotiating table, but this time with a weakened nuclear program and military strength. Such a ceasefire would allow Tel Aviv to preserve its military achievements, like setting back Iran’s nuclear program for several years without any engagement in a regional war. Through Qatari mediation, the US managed to facilitate a ceasefire to preserve international support for the Zionist regime.

Outlook

An assessment of the preferred scenarios for the Zionist regime and the US against Iran shows that at least the first two scenarios faced fundamental challenges due to military limitations, diplomatic complexities, and unpredictable consequences. A decisive victory for the Zionist regime was unrealistic due to the inability to destroy Iran’s nuclear program and Iran’s considerable capabilities. Dealing irreparable blows would have been as damaging to the Zionist regime as it could have been for Iran, which showed that it was fully prepared to retaliate. In the meantime, a diplomatic ceasefire was the only scenario that was more likely to be realized, and it eventually happened.

The end of the Zionist regime’s war on Iran depended on a variety of factors:

1. Military Strength of Both Sides: Despite a blitzkrieg, Iran was swift in rebuilding its military command to carry out operations. Shortly, Iran managed to reciprocate and change the balance on the battlefield. The US intervened, but it just favored a very limited conflict to spare further damage.
2. Diplomatic Pressure: Reducing tensions and ending regional and international conflicts depends on strong mediation and the willingness of both parties. Mediators, varying from Russia and Turkey to some Arab governments, had volunteered to step in, but neither party was in a position to accept the mediation offers. In the end, Qatar managed to broker a ceasefire.
3. Domestic Political and Economic Calculations: The domestic political situation, as well as economic indicators on both sides, played an important role in determining future strategies. In the Zionist regime, despite the initial comprehensive support for the military invasion of the Islamic Republic, criticism of Benjamin Netanyahu increased after the intensification of Iranian attacks. The regime also suffered significant blows in the economic sphere, particularly in energy. This was while in Iran, an unparalleled national solidarity was formed among the people.
4. Public Opinion Pressure: It was important for Netanyahu to achieve an achievement that would justify this war, because he had suffered a lot of damage by entering the war with Iran. For Iran, dealing painful blows to the Zionist regime was important both from a military perspective and necessary for managing public opinion so that the Islamic Republic would not emerge from this war as a loser.

In light of what has been said, it is noteworthy that the cessation of hostilities between Iran and the Zionist regime is by no means considered a permanent ceasefire. Rather, given the Zionist regime’s record of violating ceasefires, there is a possibility of a war breaking out at any moment. Especially since, apart from assassinating Iranian military commanders, this regime has not achieved any of its expected achievements, such as destroying Iran’s nuclear program and its military capability.

Shuaib Bahman

Intl. Affairs Analyst

Iran Petroleum