This assault—accompanied by extensive attacks on military infrastructure, service centers, hospitals, schools, and residential homes, and resulting in significant civilian casualties—has so far displayed a complex and multi-layered course. In the initial days, the opposing side focused on airstrikes and military threats in an effort to weaken Iran’s defensive capabilities and generate political pressure on the country’s governing structure. However, field evidence and analytical assessments indicate that Iran has managed, while conducting active defense, to increase pressure in return, without deploying all of its advanced capabilities or utilizing every possible dimension of warfare to strike the enemy.

One notable feature of this war has been the emergence of national unity under the Iranian flag. The widespread nighttime presence of people in city squares for mourning ceremonies and for expressing support for the armed forces has not only reduced to zero hopes of generating a domestic anti-government wave, but has also limited the enemy’s psychological warfare capacity. In cities across the country, people—through active, continuous, and coordinated participation—have demonstrated that they stand behind the country’s political and military structures, rendering ineffective any enemy assessments about internal pressure or the creation of social instability.

Alongside internal cohesion, Iran has also succeeded in controlling its borders through proactive and intelligent management. Despite attempts by the adversary to destabilize both western and eastern border areas, Iran’s pre-emptive political, security, and military measures have prevented any serious infiltration or the creation of crises. This success in border management has reduced the risk of the war spreading onto the country’s territory and has helped stabilize defensive and security capabilities.

Another remarkable indicator in this war is the complex and multi-layered structure of Iran’s operational command and management. Although the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution and several senior commanders of the armed forces were martyred on the first day of the war, Iran—both in responding to the attacks and in launching and continuing offensive operations—has acted in a fully coordinated, cohesive, and powerful manner. This performance diverges significantly from the enemy’s initial assessments and demonstrates that Iran’s ability to manage the war exceeds the adversary’s expectations.

In recent days, one of Iran’s most influential levers has been the intelligent management of the Strait of Hormuz. Ship traffic has been halted or restricted in a controlled manner, without Iran resorting to mines, drones, or large-scale missile attacks. This indicates that, contrary to the enemy’s assumptions, missile and drone capabilities are not the decisive factor in determining the outcome of the war; rather, Iran’s ability to manage the flow of energy is the primary strategic instrument for shaping the war’s outcome in its favor. The focus on controlling energy routes through intelligent and low-cost methods has not only affected global energy flows—leading to unprecedented increases in the prices of oil, gas, and other petroleum products—but has also imposed direct economic and political pressure on dependent countries, particularly the United States.

An analysis of developments over the past six days shows that the end of the war will not be simple or immediate. The United States and Israel, which initiated this illegal war, cannot halt the conflict without achieving a tangible result due to internal constraints and pressure from public opinion. On the other hand, Iran—because the enemy crossed its red lines and because of the martyrdom of the Supreme Leader—has indicated it is unwilling to compromise and has officially announced that it is prepared for a prolonged war aimed at fully punishing the aggressor. This situation has made the prospects for ending the war uncertain.

Nevertheless, one strategic point is clear: the energy market and the transit routes for Persian Gulf oil are the most decisive factors in shaping international pressure to halt the war. The longer the conflict continues and the greater the disruption in energy transit routes, the more likely it is to trigger surging oil prices, intensify global economic pressure, and increase political and social costs inside the United States and other countries. Under such conditions, even without resorting to advanced military capabilities, Iran can create an effective deterrent and pressure lever using relatively simple and available tools.

From a strategic perspective, the outlook for ending the war depends on the interaction between economic pressure, Iran’s capabilities, and the political and economic limitations facing the aggressor. If the pressure resulting from the control of energy flows increases—and if its effects, through rising energy prices and inflation, become tangible in the US economy and public opinion—the adversary will be forced to halt the war by retreating from its initial objectives and constructing a minimal, narratable achievement. In such circumstances, the initiative and the preconditions for a ceasefire would fall into Iran’s hands. The continuation of Iran’s intelligent management of the course of the war—particularly in the areas of national cohesion and control of energy flows—will determine the path toward the conflict’s end.