Egyptian analyst Karm Gaber has posed a thought-provoking question regarding Iran's capacity to create chaos despite facing significant military strikes, economic sanctions, and targeted assassinations for over six months. Gaber's inquiry seeks to understand how Iran continues to maintain its resilience and mobilize multiple fronts simultaneously. He cautions against assuming that Iran's continued turmoil constitutes a victory, as Tehran has incurred substantial costs and suffered considerable damage to its military and economic infrastructure.
According to Gaber, Iran's strength lies not solely in its military capabilities, such as its aircraft and missiles, but in its comprehensive system of "non-traditional power." This encompasses various elements, including the Revolutionary Guard, ballistic missiles, drones, security agencies, and a network of armed groups and allies across the region. Iran has also cultivated significant political and economic influence, rendering the destruction of a specific base, facility, or the assassination of a leader not necessarily catastrophic to the overall system.
The conflict is not a conventional war between two armies on a defined front but rather a multifaceted battle that extends from Iran's depths to the Gulf, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, and the Red Sea. This expansive conflict involves navigation, energy, military bases, and vital facilities, making it challenging for direct military superiority to achieve a decisive victory or a clear political resolution. Iran is cognizant of the disparity in its military strength compared to the United States and Israel, prompting it to adopt a strategy of protracted conflict.
By prolonging the conflict, Iran aims to increase the complexity and costs for its adversaries. The strategy of attrition does not solely target Tehran but also imposes substantial financial, military, and logistical burdens on Washington. These efforts consume resources and deplete arsenals, rendering the strategy of economic strangulation ineffective in forcing Iran's capitulation. Despite considerable pressure and damage to living conditions within Iran, the economic crisis does not automatically translate into political collapse.
The military escalation has significant implications, but a critical "missing link" in American military calculations has been the underestimation of the impact of destroying civilian and military infrastructure on the Iranian regime's stability. The US has failed to conduct a thorough assessment of the groups operating in the region and the potential for new, more challenging networks to emerge. On the current operational stage, it is evident that military power can destroy facilities but is insufficient on its own to topple governments.
The destruction of missiles does not necessarily eliminate the capacity for further production. Today, Iran is considerably weaker than before the war began, with substantial military, economic, and strategic losses. However, in strategic terms, weakness and collapse are distinct phenomena. As long as the foundations of Iran's non-traditional power and its network of influence remain intact, without addressing the deep-seated political and geopolitical challenges, the door remains open for future rounds of conflict.
These potential conflicts could be even more intense and difficult to manage. The situation underscores the complexity of the Iranian issue and the limitations of military power in achieving a decisive victory. The international community must consider a comprehensive approach that addresses not only the military aspects but also the underlying political and economic factors contributing to Iran's resilience.
Key points
- Iran's non-traditional power and network of influence have allowed it to maintain resilience despite significant military pressure and economic sanctions.
