Following the conclusion of the "Ramadan War" and despite the diplomatic breathing room that the recent Memorandum of Understanding attempted to provide, military developments on Iranian soil are taking a dramatic turn.
The extensive strikes by CENTCOM using new-generation smart weapons in the southern provinces of Iran, the blockade of ports, and the total destruction of critical naval infrastructure, such as the control tower in Chabahar, prove that Washington has passed into a new, devastating phase of operations.
What the American strategy hides
In this explosive setting, Dr. Ebrahim Mottaqi, Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Law and Political Science at the University of Tehran, intervenes with a highly realistic and internal warning through the newspaper Etemad.
The Iranian academic sounds the alarm, making it clear that the Trump administration is not seeking an ephemeral, tactical victory of impressions in the field.
On the contrary, the goal of the USA is the permanent reversal of the power equation in the region and the lifelong geopolitical and economic confinement of Iran.
According to Mottaqi, the traditional doctrine of Iranian asymmetric resistance is reaching its limits, and Tehran is now called upon to choose between radical diplomatic flexibility or a well-calculated "strategic shock" that will target the heart of American C4ISR systems.
Costly and dangerous results
As he points out, even though Iran deploys confrontation mechanisms and asymmetric operations after each period of USA military action, this trend leads to extremely costly and high-risk results, due to the "difference in tactical comparative advantage" between the two countries.
According to reports from the United States Central Command (CENTCOM), American forces have deployed the entirety of their capabilities, including fighter jets, unmanned aerial vehicles, drones, and warships with precision munitions, striking a multitude of tactical infrastructures, as well as military and economic facilities of Iran.
The operations against logistics structures and general infrastructure in the southern provinces and other cities of Iran were so extensive that even the naval control tower in Chabahar was destroyed after successive military strikes.
1) The tactical approaches of Iran after the Memorandum of Understanding
The Memorandum of Understanding, MoU, can be considered a turning point in diplomatic contacts between Iran and the United States.
Based on the diplomatic initiative of Asim Munir and other political officials of the region, the political leaders of the two countries attempted to lay the foundations for a "regional pacification" and for the "transition from military conflict."
Although the memorandum was strongly criticized by "rival groups" both inside Iran and the USA, the results of this bilateral agreement functioned as a springboard for a peaceful de-escalation from high-risk regional tensions.
Under these conditions, the critical question for strategic analysts is: what model of tactical action should the military and diplomatic echelons of Iran adopt the day after the agreement with the USA?
The resistance of Iran led to the Memorandum
The effective and extensive resistance of Iran against the invasion and the generalized war of the USA and Israel was what shaped the ground for the drafting of the memorandum.
This agreement is considered a sample of Iran's success in the "Ramadan War."
As the USA and Israel failed to fulfill their objective goals in that conflict, known as "Operation Epic Fury", it was expected that they would seek mechanisms that would smooth the ground for the resumption of the war in a new tactical environment.
The strategic needs of the Islamic Republic imposed the memorandum as a "guide for lasting peace" and for a constructive stance in the region.
However, certain Iranian assumptions led to the underestimation of the consequences of a generalized conflict with the USA:
a) The argument of deterrence
Many military commanders in Iran rely on "tactical capabilities" and the "will for retaliation" against the USA.
b) The reality of CENTCOM
Although Iran excels in these two areas, the military power of CENTCOM, due to technological capabilities and the new generation of smart weapons, tends in the long run to eliminate any balance of power.
c) Geopolitical limitations
Iran possesses the geopolitical capability to connect the Persian Gulf with the Sea of Oman and the Indian Ocean.
However, the possibility of exploiting this advantage during the "second wave" of the American attack has been significantly limited by the offensive actions of the USA, restricting Iranian countermeasures.
The Sea of Oman offers Iran a direct connection to the trade corridors of East Asia, China, India, South Korea, Japan.
Under a state of peace, this would yield huge economic benefits.
Under a state of war, understanding the consequences of each operation is a primary need for planning tactical moves.
2) Tactical consequences of the second phase of the US war
The United States, as a global superpower with a broad arsenal, seek a definitive and total victory over Iran. Although JD Vance and Donald Trump accepted the memorandum as a tactical way out of the war, their long-term goal remains the same.
The action model of CENTCOM is based on "offensive defensive action," which is designed to hit the economic and strategic infrastructure of Iran.
The implementation of this strategy against a country that lacks adequate air defense and modern defensive means produces the desired results for the USA.
Step 1 - The "smart" naval blockade
The first phase concerns a "smart naval blockade."
The American navy strictly controls ships heading to Iranian ports, increasing economic pressure on Iran, without simultaneously directly affecting the interests of third countries using the Persian Gulf.
Step 2 - Dismantling of infrastructure with strikes from suicide drones
The USA attempted to change the control status in the Strait of Hormuz, eliminating the chain of tactical capabilities of Iran in the south. The targets were not only floating means, but also coastal facilities, causing serious losses in human and material resources.
Step 3 - Destruction of infrastructure and logistics with precision strikes
CENTCOM used suicide drones against ship repair facilities in Bandar Abbas, while proceeding with the destruction of air defense systems, coastal radars, cruise missile batteries, as well as control and logistics centers.
For these operations, CENTCOM deployed 2 aircraft carriers, 20 warships, 10,000 tactical personnel, and more than 100 fighter jets and drones.
Under these conditions, the capabilities of Iran to affect the regional environment have suffered a serious blow.
Iran ought to have used diplomatic mechanisms more effectively to prevent this new phase of attrition of its strategic resources.
3) The unstable deterrence of Iran in the post-memorandum era
Iran, due to its geopolitical position, retains the capability to project resistance.
Δuring the American-Israeli pressure, the conditions were created for the activation of a "maritime security architecture."
Despite the severe strikes by CENTCOM, the defense structure of the Islamic Republic retains a level of decentralized command, capable of delivering strikes on American facilities in the region.
However, the military diplomacy policy of Trump has noticeably limited the capability of Iran to export oil toward China and India.
Although the capabilities for broad action are now limited, the geopolitical position of Iran remains critical for connecting the countries of Central Asia and the Caucasus, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, with international mineral wealth markets.
The strategic nature of resistance
Resistance is an effective tactic for achieving intermediate phase goals, but it cannot by itself fulfill the entirety of a country's strategic pursuits.
To overcome existing security challenges, Iran must demonstrate diplomatic flexibility and change the framework of its actions.
The preservation of the structure of the political system, national cohesion, and territorial integrity constitute the basic conditions. if these are ignored in the name of a blind tactical resistance, the future of the country becomes extremely risk-centric.
The need for a strategic paradigm shift
Objective conditions show that the United States are not merely seeking an ephemeral victory on the battlefield.
Their goal is the permanent change of the power equation in the region, turning Iran into a state incapable of reacting directly and in a balanced manner.
The USA systematically limit the layers of defense of Iran, so as to eliminate the probability of effective counter-operations.
To escape this war of attrition, Iran needs a "tactical paradigm shift."
This can only be achieved if the capability is developed to hit the regional command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, C4ISR systems, centers of the enemy.
Only such a "strategic shock" to the means and facilities of the USA could overturn the facts and create a new balance of power in the region.
For now the USA receive a hard lesson: war is not a video game
The missiles of Iran made Trump realize that war is not an electronic game writes Nour News (@nournews_ir)!
In its post it states that, if Trump has imagined that he can commit crimes against Iran and his soldiers remain protected from the response, the retaliation, one should doubt his logic even more.
According to the expression of the Leader of the Revolution, the nation of Iran and the Resistance Front give unforgettable lessons to America.
As stated in the post: "Western media transmitted the death of American soldiers in Jordan and the fury of Trump.
If Trump thinks he can commit crimes against Iran and his soldiers will have immunity from retaliation, then his mental health should be questioned even more.
In the words of the Leader of the Revolution, the Iranian nation and the Resistance Front give unforgettable lessons to America."
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών