The Middle East is on the brink of an unprecedented escalation. Recent US–Israel operations against Iran—Roaring Lion and Epic Fury—have shattered previous assumptions about the regional balance of power. Thousands of strikes have targeted Iranian leadership, military infrastructure, and critical civilian systems, employing a combination of kinetic bombardment and psychological pressure designed to force Tehran’s hand.

Yet, rather than collapsing under duress, Iran has demonstrated remarkable resilience, retaining substantial missile and drone capabilities that repeatedly frustrate Washington and Tel Aviv. Efforts to cripple Iran’s nuclear and defence sectors have fallen short, exposing the limitations of conventional military superiority against an adaptive, asymmetric adversary.

For Israel and the United States, the strategic calculus is now stark: the conflict may only conclude through negotiated exit terms—terms that preserve face for both sides. Yet diplomacy demands Iran’s consent, a commodity Tehran has little reason to offer prematurely, particularly after losing key leaders and enduring severe infrastructural damage. As one scholar aptly noted, “you cannot keep peace where there is no peace to keep.” Pushing Iran through coercion may only prolong hostilities, magnifying global economic and security risks.

Washington and Tel Aviv have explicitly framed regime change as a strategic objective. They have amplified domestic dissent within Iran through digital campaigns and political messaging. Yet raising expectations of an imminent collapse carries political risk: failure to achieve regime change may be interpreted as defeat, imposing reputational costs on both governments. Analysts widely doubt that the Islamic Republic will crumble in the near term.

Operationally, the conflict has........

© The Friday Times