Iran is pursuing a strategy of endurance in its confrontation with the United States and Israel, aiming to turn the conflict into a prolonged war of attrition rather than a decisive military showdown. By launching sustained waves of drones and missiles and threatening vital energy corridors, Tehran is attempting to raise global economic costs, disrupt markets and create political pressure on Washington to step back.
Despite heavy losses from the opening strikes, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) remains firmly in control of military strategy. The force is directing operations, activating contingency plans and shaping targets across the conflict theatre. Insiders say the IRGC also played a central role in elevating Mojtaba Khamenei as Iran’s supreme leader after the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Security analysts describe Iran’s posture as an existential fight in which survival of the state outweighs all other considerations. This mindset is reflected in expanding strikes across the Gulf region, including attempts to target energy infrastructure in multiple countries. The objective is to maximize economic disruption and transmit financial shockwaves to regional rivals, Europe and the United States, thereby testing political resolve in Western capitals.
US President Donald Trump said the war would continue until Iran is decisively defeated, while also suggesting it could conclude quickly. He stated that once operations end, Tehran would be left unable to threaten the US, Israel or American allies for an extended period.
Iranian officials, however, indicate the current escalation follows a long-prepared plan built on the assumption that confrontation with Washington and Israel was inevitable. With limited room to retreat, Tehran is now executing a layered strategy coordinated across IRGC military networks and allied groups, seeking to prolong the conflict and exhaust adversaries politically and economically.
A major uncertainty is how long Iran can sustain its missile campaign, which forms the backbone of its deterrence strategy. US officials say much of Iran’s arsenal has been destroyed, while regional sources suggest a significant stockpile remains. If missile capacity endures for several more weeks, the prolonged pressure could amplify economic strain and political debate in the United States and allied countries.
Inside Iran, authorities appear to be shifting toward a wartime economic posture. Port clearances and logistics processes have reportedly accelerated to protect supply chains, reflecting preparation for extended disruption. Observers also note increased institutional control by the IRGC, indicating consolidation of power during crisis conditions.
Domestic stability remains a critical factor. Reports indicate no major protests, elite fractures or institutional breakdowns so far. Daily life continues in major cities despite bombardment, with businesses operating and essential supplies available. Some observers suggest external attacks may be strengthening national solidarity rather than triggering unrest, as fears of state fragmentation grow.
Strategists increasingly frame the conflict as a test of endurance: whether Iran can maintain sustained strikes and whether the United States and Israel can absorb economic, military and political costs. Tehran’s approach relies on energy market disruption and financial pressure to influence Western decision-making, particularly amid domestic political sensitivities.
Analysts suggest that if economic pressure intensifies, Washington could eventually seek an exit while presenting strategic gains. For Iran, survival alone would be positioned as a victory, even if key infrastructure is heavily damaged. The likely outcome may be a weakened but resilient state whose future posture remains volatile and unpredictable.
