U.S. military bases and assets are currently at their highest level of alert amidst escalating tensions in the Middle East, particularly following the onset of hostilities between Israel and Iran starting June 13. Concerns regarding potential Iranian attacks on U.S. interests and assets have intensified, especially given Iran’s history of asymmetric warfare tactics.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has recently warned of “everlasting consequences” in response to ongoing conflicts, highlighting the serious implications of the current situation.
Historically, Iran has employed strategies such as proxy warfare to counter stronger adversaries, notably engaging in operations through groups like Hezbollah in response to U.S. interventions in the region. In 1983, Iran was accused of orchestrating attacks in Beirut that resulted in the deaths of hundreds, showcasing its readiness to adopt lethal measures.
However, experts note that Iran’s capabilities to effectively execute terrorist attacks within the United States are limited, as previous attempts have often been botched. U.S. intelligence maintains that Iran has struggled to execute successful operations on American soil, relying on untrustworthy operatives.
Iran’s geopolitical position is increasingly precarious, with diminishing reliable allies and limited regional support for expanded conflict. Analysts suggest that Tehran finds itself in a bind, balancing the risk of military retaliation against U.S. targets and the potential fallout from a prolonged military confrontation.
H.A. Hellyer of the Royal United Services Institute commented, “They’re really stuck. If they fight back by striking American targets, then the U.S. is very likely to respond with a much more aggressive campaign that could cause extensive damage, not only to the regime but to the country at large.”
Nonetheless, experts warn that an absence of retaliation could undermine the already fragile cohesion within the Iranian ruling class, mired in corruption and public dissatisfaction. Jonathan Panikoff of the Atlantic Council suggests that Iranian leaders must carefully consider their domestic stability while strategizing their response to external threats.
Past instances demonstrate Iran’s calculated responses to U.S. provocations. Following the U.S. drone strike that killed top Iranian general Qassem Soleimani in January 2020, Iran retaliated with missile strikes on U.S. bases in Iraq, resulting in injuries but no fatalities, indicating a restrained approach aimed at signaling strength while avoiding full-scale war.
Currently, Iran’s military capabilities are under scrutiny, particularly its air defense systems. Israeli airstrikes have targeted these defenses over recent weeks, further complicating Iran’s military posture.
The recent escalation involving Iranian missile strikes on Israel has caused considerable damage, with at least 24 fatalities reported. Analysts expect these developments to lead to further escalations in the conflict between Iran and Israel. Fawaz Gerges from the London School of Economics noted, “Iran will try to redouble its efforts against Israel in order to show its determination to inflict damage on its arch enemy.”
However, Iran appears cautious about becoming embroiled in a broader conflict with the United States. In the Persian Gulf, U.S. allies are anxious about potential Iranian retaliation, particularly missile strikes on American forces stationed in their territories. Panikoff indicated that regional nations are fearful of Iranian aggression, highlighting the delicate security balance in the area.
The U.S. maintains a significant military presence across the region, including bases in Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates. Recent U.S. military actions have involved repositioning aircraft and naval assets to mitigate vulnerability to potential Iranian strikes.
Despite these moves, it remains unclear whether Iranian missiles have the capability to overcome U.S. missile defense systems. Hellyer noted that while Iran maintains approximately 40% of its missile launchers, their efficacy has likely been diminished by targeted strikes from Israeli forces.
On the U.S. side, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth assured that the U.S. would respond swiftly and decisively if its interests were threatened, signaling a strong stance toward any potential Iranian aggression.
Iran’s network of proxy forces has also suffered significant setbacks, facing continuous challenges from U.S. and Israeli operations in the region. Hezbollah, Iran’s most crucial ally in Lebanon, has suffered severe losses and is currently less inclined to engage in what could become a direct confrontation with Israel.
In addition to military measures, the landscape also includes the cyber realm where Iran has developed capabilities that pose a notable threat. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps is considered one of the principal actors in cyber operations against U.S. interests, with a history of linked cyber retaliation following military confrontations.
Iran has been accused of engaging in various cyber intrusions, affecting American corporations and infrastructure systems. Cyberattacks could serve as a strategic avenue for Iran in the wake of conventional military conflicts, especially given growing vulnerabilities in U.S. cyber defenses due to previous budget cuts.
While a broader conflict between Iran and the U.S. remains a significant concern, the complex dynamics in the region—with various actors and interests at play—suggest a careful game of strategy for Iran. With limited allies and a multitude of threats weighing on its regime, Iran’s response to this ongoing crisis will likely be cautious and calculated, reflecting its precarious position in an increasingly hostile environment.
image source from：nbcnews
