ceasefire

Iran Signals No Immediate Ceasefire, Prioritizes Deterrence

As the conflict intensifies, Iran is making it clear that a ceasefire is not currently on the table. According to Hassan Ahmadian, an Iranian strategist and defense theorist with close ties to the Islamic Republic’s security establishment, any cessation of hostilities will only come after the United States has “imposed costs high enough that they don’t willy-nilly attack us again.” This signals a shift towards a strategy of deterrence, aiming to discourage future aggression through demonstrable retaliation.

Calm Amidst the Bombing

Despite ongoing aerial bombardments, Ahmadian projects a remarkable calm. Speaking on Thursday evening, he described hearing “sounds” of impacts, noting that whereas clinics, military, and police targets are being hit, Tehran’s vast size makes comprehensive destruction a significant challenge. This composure reflects a belief in the resilience of the Iranian system.

Regime Resilience and Institutional Strength

Ahmadian emphasizes the deep institutionalization of the Islamic system, asserting that even the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei did not create a power vacuum. He states that governmental units continued to function, with the military and civil servants maintaining their respective roles. This suggests a robust and adaptable governance structure designed to withstand significant disruption.

Beyond Protests: A Divided Society

While acknowledging societal polarization and recent protests, Ahmadian downplays the notion of widespread support for regime change. He contends that the majority of Iranians, while not necessarily supporters of the current government, are unwilling to accept foreign invasion. He estimates a conservative base of support for the regime at around 15% of the population, comprised of those with ideological convictions and access to privileges.

Western Miscalculations and Propaganda

Ahmadian criticizes Western media for portraying a skewed picture of Iranian sentiment, highlighting reports of celebrations following bombings as disproportionately emphasized. He warns against the dangers of propaganda, suggesting it can lead to misinformed decision-making and entrenchment in flawed narratives. He also points out that the Islamic Republic was previously misled by its own propaganda regarding the strength of the “Axis of Resistance.”

Learning from Past Mistakes

Ahmadian references the “12-Day War,” suggesting that accepting a ceasefire then fostered a perception of Iranian weakness. He argues that Iran has learned from this experience and is now focused on imposing significant costs on aggressors to deter future attacks. This includes targeting regional assets and demonstrating a willingness to escalate the conflict.

Deterrence as a Core Strategy

The current Iranian strategy centers on deterrence – a combination of punishment and credible threats. Ahmadian believes the U.S. Has underestimated Iran’s capacity for initiative and foresight, operating within a “bubble” that prevents a realistic assessment of the situation. He also criticizes the shifting and often contradictory objectives articulated by American officials.

Regional Implications and Arab Concerns

Ahmadian suggests that Iran’s actions are forcing regional allies of the U.S. To reassess their dependence on Washington. While acknowledging Arab concerns about attacks on civilian infrastructure, he argues that these attacks are legitimate targets due to their use by the U.S. In operations against Iran. He believes Arab nations recognize that What we have is not their war, but a conflict between America and Israel.

Future Outlook: Depleting Defensive Capabilities

Looking ahead, Ahmadian anticipates a period of sustained conflict. He suggests Iran intends to deplete Israel’s defensive capabilities, specifically mentioning David’s Sling and THAAD batteries, and plans to launch “crushing attacks” within the next 10 days. He also claims that many of the targets struck by the U.S. And Israel were decoys.

FAQ

Q: Is Iran seeking regime change in the U.S.?
A: No, the source material indicates Iran is focused on deterring further attacks and ensuring its own security, not on changing the U.S. Government.

Q: What is Iran’s primary goal in this conflict?
A: According to Ahmadian, Iran’s primary goal is to raise the costs of aggression to a level that discourages future attacks from the U.S. And Israel.

Q: Is there significant internal opposition to the Iranian regime?
A: While acknowledging societal polarization and protests, Ahmadian suggests that the majority of Iranians are not prepared to accept foreign invasion and do not necessarily desire regime change.

Q: What role does deterrence play in Iran’s strategy?
A: Deterrence is central to Iran’s strategy, combining punishment for past actions with credible threats to prevent future aggression.

Did you know? Iran’s political system is designed for continuity, even in the face of leadership changes, with parallel institutions ensuring ongoing functionality.

Pro Tip: Understanding the historical context of previous conflicts, like the “12-Day War,” is crucial for interpreting Iran’s current strategy.

What are your thoughts on Iran’s strategy? Share your insights in the comments below!