By Sally Goldman
I have narrowed what I find true intelligence to be. It is a state where thirst for knowledge does not exceed humbleness, an open mind to see multiple points, acceptance of hypothetical, relational, realistic and perceptual truths and falsehoods, and having the maturity to decipher it and hold a meaningful relevant conversation to achieve an end state or goal — and learn in the process.
Iran cannot escalate more than they already have for the past decade. Hezbollah is collapsed. Hamas is nearly gone. Houthis are being crushed. Iran itself has had its military and nuclear leadership eradicated along with their nuclear facilities and missile strike capabilities. No meaningful help will be afforded by them from anywhere, and whatever comes won’t last.
If the Iranian Supreme Council decides to take action to block the Straits of Hormuz, they would first of all find it militarily difficult, and, moreover, they will shut their own stream of revenue — which is a condition they could not sustain.
Russian leaders are stoking panic, as usual, with allusions to nuclear weapons, which only confirms that Iran was on the verge of making their own nuclear weapons. The risk was intolerable for the U.S., therefore the world; that risk has been well mitigated.
As expected, the U.S. asserts that it was able to deliver a devastating blow to Iran’s nuclear program and halt the creation of a nuclear weapon. Iranian representatives claim that the damage is not serious. Western media have been very open to all kinds of expert opinions suggesting that the strikes failed. Such views are beginning to appear in large numbers, both as part of Iran’s (and Russia’s) influence operations and independently of them. The U.S. Secretary of Defense emphasized in his statement that the U.S. strike was carried out in such a way that it targeted only nuclear facilities. The attack did not affect civilian infrastructure or military bases. The U.S. confirms that it will cease strikes if Iran does not retaliate.
On its part, Iran has vowed to target, in addition to Israel and the U.S., sites in the United Kingdom, France, and Germany; to withdraw from the nuclear agreement; and to close the Strait of Hormuz. During yesterday, primarily Russia and Iran began mounting informational and diplomatic pressure on the U.S. Iran’s foreign minister became active and set off on a visit to Russia. Since Iran cannot risk carrying out merely a symbolic attack on U.S. targets in the Middle East, an alternative is to prepare a longer-term counterstrike.
Meanwhile, Iran is seeking international diplomatic support to avoid negotiations with the U.S. Iran’s foreign minister announced that the door to diplomacy is closed. He is attempting to build a narrative that Iran has the right to strike back at the U.S. at any suitable future time. Russia’s role appears to be to explain that there was no legal basis for attacking Iran, and so on. Iran is also trying to increase pressure with threats to close the Strait of Hormuz to shipping. However, implementing that threat would lead to a serious conflict with Arab states, and Iran could lose its entire naval fleet.
Iran is attempting to engineer a situation in which the U.S. would be seen as the aggressor, thereby freeing itself from pressure to negotiate over its nuclear program. The U.S. may thus find itself in a situation where it has not achieved a clearly definitive resolution to the crisis, and ensuring the safety of its forces in the Middle East requires substantial resources.
For Russia, that would be a dream scenario. For Iran, it would also be a very exhausting scenario, demanding readiness to endure airstrikes by the opponent at any moment and to account for very heavy losses. At the same time, time would be bought in the hope that new developments might offer new opportunities to resolve the situation.
