The strategic chessboard in the prevailing Iran-U.S.-Israel war reflects the gamble of the United States and Israel when Tehran was attacked on February 28. More than a month has passed, and neither America nor Israel is able to dismantle the Iranian regime or destroy its nuclear and missile programme. On the contrary, Iran, despite facing colossal bombing, is a winner on the strategic chessboard.

It is the mapping and decision-making on a chessboard which matters for winning or losing a game or a gamble. The United States and Israel gambled against Iran, considering it an easy target, a weak and fragile player which would be defeated in a few days. However, such miscalculations reflected that both America and Israel were unable to gauge the motivation and resilience of Iran, which in the last 38 days of war has emerged as the strongest player on the chessboard.

Why did American and Israeli calculations, despite their superior military and technological power, fail to understand that even if the war is asymmetrical, it can be won by the weaker side if that country is equipped with the power of strategic decision-making, motivation, and resilience? Despite spending more than 40 billion dollars in a war against Iran, America and Israel are unable to defeat Tehran because both powers misunderstood the edge held by Iran on the strategic chessboard.

America and Israel, as the two players on the chessboard, used their might to quell Iran but failed because they lacked strategic thinking, motivation, and resilience. Chess is a two-player game, but in prevailing conditions, one player is Iran and the other player is composed of Israel and the United States. Certainly, in a given situation, despite its colossal losses so far, Iran is a winner in this game. The question is: can Israel and the United States, with their combined power, prevail over Iran?

On the chessboard, will Iran retreat and face defeat because it cannot cope with the joint American and Israeli military attacks? As things stand today, despite its weaknesses and the asymmetrical nature of war, Iran is winning, but one cannot predict how long it can sustain its war with the Jewish state and the U.S.

In a write-up in the Jerusalem Post on March 27, 2026, it is stated that, “Although Operation Rising Lion, aka Epic Fury, is being fought in one geographic arena, it is best understood as a war unfolding across three distinct chessboards. On the first chessboard, the direct military contest between Israel and Iran, the outcome is clear. Israel has won decisively.

Within just three weeks, the IDF, working in close coordination with CENTCOM, has dismantled much of Iran’s core military infrastructure and reduced its capabilities to the lowest possible level. In strategic terms, the potential existential threat Iran poses to Israel has been dramatically diminished.

Iran also made a tactical mistake by closing the Strait of Hormuz and launching missile and drone attacks on Gulf countries. As a result, Iran is facing regional isolation, which does not go in its favour

Iran also made a tactical mistake by closing the Strait of Hormuz and launching missile and drone attacks on Gulf countries. As a result, Iran is facing regional isolation, which does not go in its favour

On the regional chessboard, however, the picture is far more complicated. Iran responded with an asymmetric strategy aimed at offsetting the conventional superiority of Israel and the United States. The third chessboard is the global one. At this level, the war extends far beyond the Middle East. By threatening the Strait of Hormuz – a strategic chokepoint for the global economy – Iran raised the stakes for Washington and turned a regional conflict into a broader international crisis.” It is yet to be seen how the regional chessboard, composed of Iran and the Gulf states, will react to American and Israeli threats to Tehran and to what extent the UN Security Council, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), and European Union will tolerate Iran’s partial closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

In an article in The Arab Weekly by Iman Zayat, published on June 30, 2025, the writer states that, “When I first learned to play chess at the age of six, my uncle explained that the game had its origins in ancient Persia, with foundational terms like shah (king) and mat (checkmate) drawn directly from the Persian language. While the game’s earliest form, chaturanga, emerged in India, it was in Persia that it evolved into a sophisticated art of strategy, eventually spreading westward through the Arab world and into Europe.

Given this cultural inheritance, it is perhaps unsurprising that Iran’s recent confrontation with Israel bore many of the hallmarks of that ancient strategic ethos. In what resembled a modern chess match, waged not with bishops and pawns but through missiles, proxies, and diplomatic manoeuvres, Tehran conducted itself with the deliberation of a seasoned tactician, measured in its provocations and meticulous in its restraint.” Since the game of chess has its origins in Iran (Persia), the people of that country know better how to win that game, which has been proved in the June 2025 and February–March 2026 wars with the United States and Israel.

The strategic chessboard in the context of the ongoing Iran-U.S. and Israel war needs to be examined from two standpoints. First, despite having military and technological superiority, Israel and the United States are unable to win the war with Iran, whereas Iran, despite its asymmetrical position with America and Israel, is winning the war.

How that has happened is not difficult to gauge. Iran, unlike Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq, has strategic depth, and its terrain denies the enemy the ability to gain a strategic advantage. Knowing its strategic edge, Iran is playing on the chessboard with a specific aim: to lure the United States into a military attack and trap it in a quagmire. Perhaps the United States is aware of Iranian intentions and tactics and wants to avoid a land engagement.

However, Iran is not able to win on the chessboard regionally because no Gulf country, except Iraq to some extent, is on the side of Tehran. Iran also made a tactical mistake by closing the Strait of Hormuz and launching missile and drone attacks on Gulf countries. As a result, Iran is facing regional isolation, which does not go in its favour.

One can understand the predicament of Iran: since February 28, it has been facing an Israeli and American onslaught which has not only eliminated its top leadership, both civilian and military, but also caused enormous damage to its civilian infrastructure. Claims made by the U.S. and Israel that in the June 2025 and present-day war, both powers caused damage to the nuclear and missile sites of Iran are partially true. Yet, on the chessboard, Iranian tactics and strategies are more effective than those of the United States and Israel.

Second, unlike the United States, which is facing internal schism over the war with Iran, such is not the case with Tehran. Before February 28, Iran was in turmoil domestically because the regime killed thousands of protesters. However, after February 28, when the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran, patriotism among the people surged, supporting the regime.

Iran has very effectively used its domestic support base to sustain its war with the United States and Israel. Whereas, both in Israel and in the United States, popular discontent against the war with Iran is surging. It means that, on the chessboard, luck is favouring Iran, and it can withstand superior Israeli and American military attacks.

Patience, perseverance, tactics, and strategies used in the Iran-U.S.-Israel war will ultimately decide the fate of the war. It seems that not only is luck favouring Iran, but its internal unity and cohesion are also making a difference in its war with America and Israel. The strategic chessboard of 2026 centres around war in the Gulf with regional and international players.

© The Friday Times