The war has begun to take an unfavorable turn for the United States and Israel, and it now appears to be entering a new phase as it spreads geographically.

Despite their overwhelming military strength, developments suggest that the conflict is not unfolding as they had anticipated.

Tehran seems to have been preparing for such a confrontation for decades.

An authoritarian regime, certainly, but one that systematically invested in strategies of asymmetric power. Today, it appears capable of prolonging the war far longer than was initially expected.

The first hours of the attack by the United States and Israel led to the decapitation of Iran’s theocratic and military leadership, creating the impression that the regime had suffered a shock from which it would struggle to recover.

It also cannot be ruled out that, during the first days of the war, the information reaching international public opinion was to a large extent the result of censorship/propaganda. There are indications that the assistance Russia provided to Iran in identifying the precise location of targets had been underestimated, something that may not have been detected in time by the CIA and Mossad.

However, reality is proving to be more complex. The political system of the Islamic Republic has been designed to survive even under extreme conditions. There is also the historical –almost imperial– Shiite depth that runs through Iranian society. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and the broader network of power appear to operate with a certain degree of autonomy. Even if the new leadership were to weaken further, Iran’s institutional structure still possesses mechanisms that ensure continuity.

At the same time, Tehran’s strategy appears to be based on a war of attrition and on mosaic warfare. The mass use of inexpensive drones and missiles aims to saturate the defensive systems of its adversaries. A drone that costs a few tens of thousands of dollars can force the launch of an interception missile worth millions. As the days pass, this asymmetric relationship between cost and effect may evolve into a strategic advantage for Iran.

Problems for the United States

At the same time, major cracks are beginning to appear on the ground.

“The pharaonic American bases in Saudi Arabia and the UAE have suffered devastating strikes,” says Alon Mizrahi, while radar installations and air defense systems have been damaged.

This is equipment that costs the American taxpayer billions of dollars and is extremely time-consuming to replace. This fact highlights one of the paradoxes of this war. Low-cost technology –readily available on the market– can act as an effective counterweight, disabling extraordinarily expensive weapons systems.

The cost, however, is not only military. The destruction is spreading across the region. In Israel, in Iran, in southern Lebanon, and in other Middle Eastern countries, cities and critical infrastructure have been severely affected. Schools are being destroyed, hospitals and energy facilities targeted, and civilians are bearing the consequences. Images of ruined, massive buildings make it clear that every war –no matter how “strategic” it may be portrayed– ultimately becomes a tragedy.

Iranian citizens –even those who oppose their country’s theocratic regime– find it difficult to accept the leveling of their cities. The Guardian published an intriguing anonymous article from Tehran. History has shown that war often rallies populations around their governments, even when those governments face internal discontent – a rallying that evokes memories of The Blitz, the bombing of London.

Approximately fifteen countries are directly affected by this war, while the Strait of Hormuz sits at the center of energy uncertainty. Markets are reacting, energy prices are climbing, and the global economy faces a new uphill battle. In New York, a friend on Long Island points out, the price of a gallon of gasoline has already risen by 40 cents. It has reached $3.07 per gallon there, and in California, it’s $5.15.

The Historical Cost

There is also a deeper historical dimension. America remains a great democracy and a power that has decisively shaped the modern world, despite its mistakes. Israel, for its part, is a state born out of the horror of the Holocaust. For its people, security is not merely a political choice, it is a profoundly existential matter.

Precisely for this reason, history reminds us that even the most powerful forces must beware the trap of hubris. Perhaps renaming an American ministry the “Department of War” does not make waging war any easier. Yet this renaming –coming on the heels of the “Iranian blows” to U.S. bases– shocks the conscience. And the longer the war drags on, the greater the risk of uncontrolled escalation.

Has the war already been lost? Are the Kurds –the most wronged people in the broader region– willing to play any role in western Iran? Why are fewer and fewer voices talking about regime change? As things stand, the wisest course for Washington is gradual de-escalation and disengagement from the conflict, returning instead to dialogue and a strategy of containing Tehran. Preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons remains a critical objective, but it is far from certain that this can be achieved through a war without end or a plan for what comes next. Mossad knows full well what is happening with Iran’s enriched uranium. It is time for International Law to stop being torn to shreds in the hands of aging leaders.

History of the twentieth century teaches us that when a war begins, no one can be certain where, how, or when it will end. And often, when hubris meets reality, it ends in “a thousand sharp swords.” The signs of this impending defeat for the West’s leading power resemble something like a new Pearl Harbor.

For Israel, as Haim Bresheeth-Zabner says, “it will regret the war with Iran.”

*

Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.

Dimitris Eleas is a political scientist, writer and independent researcher living in New York. His e-mail is: [email protected]. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.

Featured image source

Global Research is a reader-funded media. We do not accept any funding from corporations or governments. Help us stay afloat. Click the image below to make a one-time or recurring donation.