According to analysts, Iran does not have any clear off-roads to end its conflict with Israel, which could soon drag on in the United States and cause a new Middle East quagmire.
At least 240 Iranians have been killed by Israel since June 13; the majority of them civilians. The dead included prominent Iranian military figures and nuclear scientists.
Israel has struck Iran’s state television station, struck a hospital, targeted apartment complexes, and destroyed its air defenses.
Iran has responded by firing barrages of ballistic missiles at Israel, hitting residential structures, hospitals, and military installations. In Israel, the attacks have claimed the lives of at least 24 people.
According to analysts, Israel wants to end Iran’s nuclear program and possibly start a regime change.
Iran struggles to put an end to the conflict quickly because of these objectives. Iran’s official position is that it will not enter into any negotiations with the US and Israel because it fears being forced to renounce its position while it is under attack.
Iran may instead have to appoint US President Donald Trump to control Israel, which may be in his best interests to avoid starting a foreign war, even though the US leader has recently indicated his intention to attack Iran and has repeatedly stated that it is against Iranians’ wishes to avoid having a nuclear weapon.
Given the rising costs of war for Iran and the fact that Iran’s top priority is to stop, not to expand, the conflict, according to Hamidreza Aziz, an expert on Iran for the Middle East Council for Global Affairs think tank. “If the United States recognizes the urgency of de-escalation and manages to persuade Israel to stop its military campaign, then it is highly likely that Iran would consent to a ceasefire or political resolution,” said Aziz.
Few options are there.
Iran could return to the table of negotiations and reach a compromise in the event of an uprising.
However, according to analysts, Iran would be forced to abandon its nuclear program completely, which would allow its adversaries to launch a regime change without fear of consequences.
According to Reza H. Akbari, a program manager for the Institute for War and Peace Reporting’s analysis of Iran and the Middle East, North Africa, and South Asia, this is unlikely.
Iran’s nuclear program is still a powerful tool for Iran, which makes it even more powerful to negotiate with the US. He told Al Jazeera, “Giving it up would be a shocking development that I don’t foresee for the time being.”
Before Israel started the conflict, the US and Iran had already engaged in five rounds of negotiations.
Every nation has an “inalienable right” to use its nuclear arsenal for peaceful purposes, according to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, which Iran is a signatory to. Trump demanded that Iran give up its entire nuclear program.
Trump has since suggested a regime change by warning Iran to give in to a deal or face even worse consequences.
According to Negar Mortazavi, an Iran-focused expert with the Center for International Policy (CIP), Iran has few viable options.
She notes that Tehran might not necessarily have a chance of winning the conflict if Iran repudiates Israel, but that the strategy would also need to be used.
Iranian officials believe that the Israeli attacks will get harder and I believe they are accurate, Mortazavi told Al Jazeera. However, when Iran retaliates, it gives Israel an excuse to attack them once more.
Pressuring the US
Iran’s regional influence has suffered significant setbacks over the past year, making it increasingly vulnerable politically.
Iran’s long-standing ally, the Lebanese armed group Hezbollah, had long relied on it to prevent direct Israeli attacks, but Hezbollah suffered significant deterioration after waging a bloodbath against Israel last year.
Iran also lost a close ally to Syria’s former leader Bashar al-Assad in December 2024.
According to Barbara Slavin, an expert on Iran and distinguished fellow at the Stimson Centre think tank, Iran could still launch attacks against US bases and personnel through a web of Iranian-backed armed groups in the region, particularly in Iraq.
She thinks Iranian-backed organizations in Iraq might launch “warning shots” to try to sway the US public.
Trump’s nationalist “America First” base is vehemently opposed to any US involvement in international conflicts because they don’t share their domestic concerns.
And if US troops are put in harm’s way by any attacks connected to the Iran-Iran conflict, anti-interventionist sentiments are likely to rise.
According to Slavin, “the idea of Americans dying in this would make it even more contentious for [the US] than it already is.”
Iran might cause the American people’s economic suffering as a result. It has threatened to attack commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz, which would have an impact on international trade and raise oil prices. However, Slavin claimed that this action would also have a significant impact on Iran’s economy.
Slavin added that Iran also relies on commercial shipping to export oil from the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s busiest shipping corridors, between Iran and Oman. Slavin argued that any maneuver to escalate against US personnel, even as a warning, is a risky gambit and that Iran’s best course of action was to contain the conflict with Israel and postpone the conflict.
Iran has been specifically warned against attacking its assets or soldiers by Trump’s administration, which includes many war hawks.
According to Akbari, Iran is also cautious about using Iran as a pretext to directly invade Israel on the grounds that it won’t allow it to.
The US leadership is aware that in terms of industrial damage and for the regime, dragging the country further into the conflict. It runs the risk of destroying everything Iran has built in the past 40 or so years,” Akbari said.
Calculus strategic
Israel is legally responsible for funding the war, but Iran’s official position is that it will pay a lot of money for it.
Hassan Ahmadian, an assistant professor at Tehran University, concurred with him when he suggested that Israelis might call on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to end the conflict if they experience the effects of a crisis he initiated.
Ahmadian told Al Jazeera, “Iranians are quite confident that they can inflict enough retaliatory pain to get Israel to stop]its attacks.”
Given that Israel’s military infrastructure is barred from the media from reporting such information, it is unclear how much harm Iran is doing to it.
Additionally, it’s difficult to predict how long Iran will be able to wage an Israeli war.
Without the US, Israel may find it difficult to launch an offensive, according to Slavin.
She made reference to media reports that Israel is lacking defensive interceptors, which could make Iran’s long-range strikes more prone to.
The difficulties facing both adversaries could cause them to end fighting sooner rather than later, at least that is what Iran appears to be betting on.
Iran is currently attempting to “hunker down and somehow get through this,” Slavin said.
