Independent Researcher

As someone with close family still residing in Iran, I feel compelled to offer my assessment of this rapidly evolving situation. They remain safe, thankfully though their proximity to recent events lends this analysis a particular urgency.

With the Supreme Leader now deceased, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) will likely play the decisive role in determining his succession favoring a candidate aligned with its institutional priorities, yet potentially one disposed towards greater pragmatism in dealings with the West. Notably, the eldest son of Khamenei has been floated as a candidate; however, given the regime’s severely diminished credibility in the eyes of the Iranian public, his long-term viability as a leader appears doubtful.

On the military dimension, Iran appears to be approaching a state of strategic exhaustion. It entered the conflict with approximately 2,500 ballistic missiles, of which an estimated 500 have already been expended, with further stockpiles destroyed through US and Israeli strikes. With resupply heavily constrained and depletion accelerating, its capacity for sustained military engagement is declining markedly.

Domestically, the regime has haemorrhaged public legitimacy following last month’s violent crackdowns. Popular disillusionment has reached such depths that as some Iranian Jews have long remarked with wry humour Netanyahu would stand a stronger chance of becoming Iran’s president than of retaining office in Israel.

Strategically, the United States is pursuing a dual objective: degrading Iranian military capacity whilst simultaneously severing China’s access to heavily discounted Iranian oil, reportedly priced at around 30% below market rates. The threatened closure of the Strait of Hormuz poses significant risks to global energy supplies, though the US remains comparatively insulated by virtue of its robust domestic production base.

The Gulf states may yet engage in limited retaliatory gestures, largely to satisfy domestic audiences and preserve their standing before their own populations though any such actions would almost certainly occur within parameters sanctioned by Washington, rendering them of symbolic rather than strategic consequence.

Reza Pahlavi appears to be emerging as a figure actively promoted by American and Israeli actors as a prospective future leader, with reports suggesting President Trump has signalled support for him and comparable alternatives.

On the broader strategic architecture, President Trump approaching this fundamentally as a businessman is clearly calculating his own interests and prospective returns. The conflict’s ultimate trajectory is likely to hinge on high-level negotiations between Trump and Xi Jinping. China has provided Iran with advanced military systems, including missiles and drones, but may curtail or withdraw that support if American pressure reaches a sufficiently compelling threshold.

Iran’s regional proxy network has been largely neutralised. Tehran has struck US installations across the Persian Gulf, yet has conspicuously avoided Incirlik Air Base in Turkey almost certainly in acknowledgement of Turkey’s NATO membership and the escalatory risks that entails.

From Israel’s vantage point, Netanyahu appears to regard this moment as a narrow and potentially fleeting window of opportunity, one that a future US administration may be far less willing to sustain.

It is worth noting that this campaign bears the hallmarks of careful Israeli planning, which may paradoxically render it less chaotic than comparable interventions. Israel has a compelling long-term interest in Iran beyond the purely military: a stable, post-regime Iran would offer substantial oil and gas resources, a vast reservoir of human capital, and a strategically unparalleled position spanning the MENA region and the Indian Ocean littoral. From Tel Aviv’s perspective, cultivating a reliable partnership with a transformed Iran may ultimately prove more tractable and more rewarding than managing the fractious and fragmented relationships across the Arab world, including those formalised under the Abraham Accords.

In sum, I am of the view that this conflict will not be protracted. The current regime’s military capacity and political authority are both eroding rapidly. Iran confronts a stark and pressing choice: accept the terms on offer, or face considerably graver consequences. The window for a negotiated resolution remains open but it is closing.

© 2025 by MonarchGuard is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International