Phase One: Attempt to Destroy Iran’s Military Capability

Washington and Tel Aviv initially aimed to cripple Iran’s offensive and defensive capabilities, weapons stockpiles, and military production infrastructure through extensive air and missile strikes.

However, the first week of bombardment failed to achieve these goals. Iran continued to launch missile and drone attacks, indicating that its strategic reserves and operational networks remained largely intact. Iranian forces also struck targets in Israeli-controlled territory and facilities linked to enemy operations in the region, demonstrating that the balance of firepower had not become one-sided.

Iran also maintained control over the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. U.S. naval deployments in the region faced operational constraints, with some assets moving outside the range of Iranian missiles and drones.

As the conflict expanded regionally, U.S. bases in neighboring countries came under attack. Damage to radar systems and data-analysis centers—key components of the joint U.S.-Israeli operational network—reduced the effectiveness of their coordination. The escalation also created economic and social pressures for Persian Gulf Arab states hosting American bases.

Phase Two: Pressure on Infrastructure

After failing to achieve decisive military results, the United States and Israel shifted their focus to economic and energy infrastructure in an effort to increase domestic pressure on Iran.

Attacks on fuel facilities marked the beginning of this phase, but the effort quickly encountered difficulties. Disagreements reportedly emerged between the two allies, with U.S. officials suggesting that some strikes had been carried out by Israel without coordination with Washington.

Iran responded with retaliatory strikes, including attacks on the Haifa refinery and other energy-related facilities connected to the opposing side in the region. Tehran warned that continued attacks on its infrastructure would lead to broader retaliation against the United States, Israel, and supporting states.

Following these warnings, Washington stated that it did not intend to target Iran’s energy infrastructure, effectively limiting the scope of the second phase.

Phase Three: The Prospect of a War of Attrition

With the first two phases yielding limited results, the conflict may enter a prolonged war of attrition. Such a scenario would involve sustained military pressure alongside mounting economic and political costs.

Iran has repeatedly stated that it is prepared for a long conflict, and its continued defensive and retaliatory operations suggest it retains operational capacity.

A prolonged war could also have significant consequences for the global economy, including rising oil prices and financial market instability. These pressures could affect the United States politically and economically, particularly for President Donald Trump, who initiated the war without broad political backing.

Strategic Outlook

So far, the initial objectives of the war—neutralizing Iran’s military capabilities and forcing strategic concessions through infrastructure pressure—have not been achieved.

Entering a prolonged conflict would introduce further uncertainty and potentially impose higher economic and political costs on the attacking side, while also reshaping regional and global dynamics.