Entering its fourth week, the conflict between Iran, the United States, and Israel is unfolding with a dynamic that appears to defy expectations. Rather than yielding to attacks, Iran is demonstrating a hardened stance and preparing for further escalation, a shift driven by strategic calculation, historical precedent, and a perceived lack of viable diplomatic options.
The Logic of Resistance
According to international analyst Mayte Dongo Sueiro, Iran’s current approach is rooted in past experiences with diplomacy. She states, “What country would say: I was negotiating and was attacked twice, and now I’m told to negotiate? What assures me I won’t be attacked again? Nothing.” This has led to a conclusion within Iran that engaging in negotiations could be interpreted as a sign of weakness.
Sources indicate Iran is deliberately attempting to demonstrate resilience, aiming to inflict global economic costs at a faster rate than the United States can achieve military gains, as observed by a diplomat and two European officials stationed in the region.
The Strategic Importance of the Strait of Hormuz
Currently, Iran’s primary means of exerting pressure is through the Strait of Hormuz. Partial closure of this vital waterway has already impacted energy markets, making it a potent asset for Tehran.
On Saturday night, U.S. President Donald Trump issued a 48-hour ultimatum for Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, warning of potential attacks on the country’s power plants. In response, Iranian forces stated they would target energy and desalination plants in the region.
A source stated, “Iran seeks to create this aggression extremely costly for the aggressors.” Another European official added, “As long as the regime remains in power, they can terrorize the markets. For them, that is winning.”
Deterrence and Preventing Future Attacks
Beyond the immediate situation, Iran’s strategy extends to a broader objective: deterring future attacks. Iran is unwilling to concede and aims to demonstrate its ability to inflict both military and economic damage, with the intention of ensuring any aggression against it will have global consequences.
This strategy is designed to raise the cost of conflict to such a degree that adversaries will reconsider future attacks. The goal is to prevent a recurrence of the current scenario, which follows a previous conflict with Israel less than a year prior.
No Incentives for Negotiation
Contributing to this dynamic is Iran’s long-standing preparation for prolonged conflicts. Mayte Dongo Sueiro explains, “Iran has prepared for decades for this. They have foreseen that if a high-ranking official is killed, We find several levels of replacement. We’ve seen this with the supreme leader, where there were up to five candidates to replace Ali Jamenei. It’s a system designed to resist.”
This resilience is further bolstered by internal unity during wartime. Dongo Sueiro explains, “Wars of aggression tend to generate greater internal unity. The population groups together against the enemy.”
The conditions for negotiation remain distant. The Islamic Republic would only consider a ceasefire if the United States and Israel first halt their attacks and offer guarantees of non-aggression, potentially including financial compensation.
According to Dongo, there are currently no clear incentives for Iran to negotiate, as past attempts have yielded no positive results. She states, “Iran has seen that negotiating hasn’t yielded results, so there’s no reason to return to that path at this time.”
The current trajectory suggests continued escalation, with resisting—and demonstrating the capacity for damage—at the core of Iran’s strategy.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the current status of the conflict?
The conflict is ongoing, entering its fourth week with Iran adopting a more aggressive stance.
What is the significance of the Strait of Hormuz?
This proves a critical waterway for global oil supply, and Iran’s potential to disrupt it is a major point of leverage.
What are Iran’s primary goals in this conflict?
To deter future attacks and demonstrate its ability to inflict significant costs on its adversaries.
Given Iran’s stated goals of deterrence and its demonstrated willingness to escalate, what potential scenarios could unfold in the coming weeks?
