Iran: ‘Strategic Patience’ to ‘Sustained Confrontation’

marwan
June 7, 2026

By Najih Mohammad Ali

In a clear and direct language, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) affirmed that regional “peace and stability will not be achieved unless there is withdrawal from the occupied Lebanese territories.” This stance followed Hezbollah’s Secretary-General’s rejection of the Washington talks, emphasizing his refusal to separate the arenas and the “Dahieh for the North” equation.

This statement expresses a coherent strategic vision that considers regional stability inextricably linked to ending occupations and aggressions. It places the defense of Lebanon, Syria, and the region among Iran’s political and military priorities.

This shift to a strategy of “eternal war”—or continuous confrontation—and reflects a pragmatic and principled decision made by Tehran after decades of pressure and aggression. Iran did not abandon the idea of a settlement in vain; rather, it realized that relying on partial agreements with Washington, which imposes unilateral conditions and disregards the rights of peoples, is no longer a viable option.

The cowardly assassination of Martyr Qassem Soleimani, followed by direct strikes targeting high-ranking Iranian leaders, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, proved that relying solely on “strategic patience” is mistaken for weakness. Therefore, Iran has shifted to a doctrine of active deterrence based on the entire axis of resistance, making any aggression costly for its adversaries.

This transformation was not the result of the absolute dominance of a hardline faction, as Zionist-American narratives and their Arab proxies (and, of course, the Iranian opposition abroad) claim. Rather, it is a natural evolution of the Iranian elite that stood united in the face of external aggression.

After significant losses, the priority of maintaining national and revolutionary cohesion emerged. Defending revolutionary principles—exporting the spirit of resistance and confronting arrogance—has become an essential part of the regime’s identity that has become a source of strength to prevent internal collapse whilst uniting the people behind the leadership in the face of sanctions. Pragmatists and hardliners alike now agree that continued confrontation better protects national interests than concessions that could lead to disintegration.

The leaders of the Iranian regime believe—and I think they are right—that continuing the confrontation will yield greater strategic gains than any fragile peace agreement. History proves that America understands only the language of force and attrition. From Vietnam to Afghanistan, wars of attrition forced Washington to withdraw.

Today, the “Axis of Resistance” is cleverly applying this equation: Linking the arenas to prevent separate deals that would weaken Lebanon, Iraq, or Yemen, and imposes a heavy price on its adversaries. Iranian diplomacy has been transformed into the diplomacy of the field, as General Soleimani envisioned, and is now a flexible tool that buys time and exposes the contradictions of the other side, while maintaining full military readiness.

The American-Israeli strikes have already altered Tehran’s calculations in favor of adopting an offensive-defensive posture. Instead of settling for limited responses, Iran is developing comprehensive deterrent capabilities through its natural allies, who represent the will of the region’s peoples in the face of occupation.

This is a calculated escalation, a precise strategic calculation based on resilience and strategic depth. Within the elite, a balance prevails between caution, fearing losses, and resolve, which sees resistance as the only path to dignity and independence.

Compared to the previous “strategic patience,” the strategy of sustained confrontation has proven effective in preserving battlefield gains and preventing the regional collapse of the resistance axis. It has succeeded in exhausting the enemy and strengthening internal unity, despite economic challenges primarily attributed to unjust sanctions, not Iranian policy.

The most serious risk facing this strategy lies in the possibility of miscalculation by adversaries and their attempts to impose a full-scale war, but Iran has repeatedly demonstrated an exceptional capacity for resilience and adaptation.

We are indeed facing a “simmering cold war,” where there is no false peace imposed by force, nor a total war that destroys everyone. This situation serves Iran and its axis because it maintains the strategic balance, prevents surrender, and opens the door to a comprehensive and just settlement based on withdrawal from occupied territories and respect for the sovereignty of states.

In conclusion, this “perpetual war” relies on the long-term vision of the Iranian character. It is not a whim, but an existential choice imposed by the ongoing aggression against Iran and the peoples of the region.

Iran is defending itself and the dignity of the nation, and affirms that true stability begins with ending aggression, occupation, and foreign interference. This path, despite its difficulties, reinforces Tehran’s position as an indispensable regional power and paves the way for a new balance of power that respects the rights of peoples. The region needs such firm stances to achieve an honorable peace, not surrender.

The author is a researcher in Iranian and regional affairs and this article is reproduced from the Arabic Al Rai Al Youm website and reprinted in crossfirearabia.com.

Analyses

‘Insulting Phone Call’, Beirut, Iran and Changing Dynamics

CrossFireArabia
June 3, 2026

By Abdul Bari Atwan

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu demonstrated his ability to effectively redraw the maps and borders of the Middle East when he backed down from striking Beirut’s southern suburb to completely destroying it. He succumbed to the threats and pressure from US President Donald Trump. In this respect here, Iran can be considered to have become a regional superpower not only in the Middle East, the West and Central Asia, but globally.

Trump, who previously threatened to wipe Iran off the map and unleash hell upon it, destroying all its energy and electricity infrastructure, scurried like a frightened rabbit to the phone to call Netanyahu in a “call of insults,” ordering him to immediately halt all plans to bomb Beirut’s southern suburb and withdraw his troops and warplanes en route to the area, just hours before the bombings and destructions where to begin.

***

In a Washington Post interview, Trump completely changed his threatening tone and began pleading for peace with Iran, after extending the unilateral ceasefire by 60 days. More importantly, he expressed his desire for a summit with Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei as soon as an agreement is reached, and confirmed that Mojtaba, whom he had previously claimed was no longer alive, is now involved in the decision-making process regarding war and peace in the current conflict.

The new and effective ‘password’ in the Middle East, reflecting Iran’s “power shift,” is embodied in its thunderous response to the Israeli threat to destroy the southern suburb of Beirut, western Bekaa Valley, and Nabatieh. Iran launched hundreds of missiles and drones to strike deep into occupied Israel, sending a clear message: “Greater Tel Aviv in exchange for the southern suburb.”

The Iranian leadership, backed by a solid popular base, a highly advanced missile and drone industry, a naval fleet, and over 460 kilograms of uranium enriched above 60%—enriched to produce 10 nuclear bombs in a few days—says what it means and acts accordingly. It will not tolerate injustice and is prepared for all eventualities.

There is ample evidence to support this assertion, as demonstrated early Wednesday morning when Iranian missiles and drones struck US military bases in Kuwait and Bahrain in retaliation for attacks on an Iranian oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz and a communications tower on Qeshm Island, both launched from these bases.

The American-Israeli alliance has, since the October War of 1973, grown accustomed to a deeply ingrained official Arab subservience, a failure to respond to any Israeli aggression, and a refusal to reject any American dictates. Most Arab leaders turn the other cheek to Israeli and American slaps, becoming indifferent to the situation. But now, someone has emerged to uproot this system of surrender and usher in a new, truly Islamic era—an era of resistance, where the response is not merely in kind, but in a stronger and more significant way.

Mohsen Rezaei, advisor to Iran’s Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei, summarized this new military, political, and moral upheaval in a statement saying, “America and its president, Trump, should expect a barrage of missiles (hypersonic and cluster warheads) and drones should they renew their aggression against Iran.”

Netanyahu, who craved the limelight and the humiliation of Arabs, and who rubbed his hands with glee at the long line of Arab leaders queuing before his office seeking normalization and the signing of the Abraham Accords, has fallen silent and disappeared from the public eye. He no longer dares to threaten to destroy Iran alone, without America’s participation in the aggression.

The dictates Trump issued just days ago, the shifting balance of power on the ground, and Iran’s threat of retaliation for any aggression against Lebanon have evaporated. The American president, as a New York Times editorial acknowledged, has failed miserably in all his wars since arriving at the White House a year and a half ago—in Iran, Ukraine, and the Gaza Strip—and has not achieved his objectives and has become a laughingstock.

As for the Gulf states – those that normalized relations and/or those that were eager to join the “Abraham Accords” to avoid angering Trump and rejecting his demands – they reached a firm conviction that America is incapable of protecting itself, its bases, and its ships.

The most prominent evidence of this is the destruction of American military bases in their countries, including the US Navy base in Bahrain, and the closure of these bases and Saudi airspace to planes and drones, whilst preventing them from launching attacks on Iran from their territory. They saved the Hajj season, just as they saved themselves and their people from the consequences of the mirage of American power.

***

In conclusion, we sympathize with our Kuwaiti brothers who were injured as a result of an Iranian missile attack on the passenger terminal at Kuwait Airport, whether by mistake or deliberately. However, the blame lies entirely with those who allowed America to use Kuwaiti territory as a launching pad for aggression against Islamic Iran. America possesses three aircraft carriers and more than 300 warships in the Arabian Sea, so why didn’t it use them in this aggression? And why does it insist on using its bases in the Gulf states, thereby endangering millions of their citizens?

Abdul Bari Atwan is the Chief Editor of the Arabic Al Rai Al Youm and his piece has appeared in the English crossfirearabia.com English website.

News

Hush, Hush! Israeli Expert Says Iran Destroyed Spy Center in First Days of The War

CrossFireArabia
June 2, 2026

By Dr Marwan Asmar

Iran destroyed one of Israel’s most sensitive military intelligence units in the first days of the 39-day war. Israeli intelligence analyst Yossi Melman revealed that an Iranian missile struck a base belonging to Unit 9900 and put it out of action for good, creating a major psychological boost for Iran.

Melman revealed the information on the US SpyTalk website. In one of his articles he stated Unit 9900 is one of Israel’s most prominent military intelligence units, undertaking advanced tasks in intelligence gathering, analysis, and the production of field data relevant to military operations. Striking it on the first days of the war would be a major blow to the US-Israeli military alliance on Iran.

The analyst noted the Iranian missile targeting Beit Shemesh where nine Israelis were killed and the injury of dozens more, also struck sensitive facilities, including a military base located on Tel Azka, as well as a satellite station in the Wadi al-Sant (Emek Ha’ila) area, about five kilometers from Beit Shemesh according to Qudspress.

Because of the strict military censors Israel imposes, such information has only been recently received and/or talked about.

In a related matter, Melman said it is Israel that builds military bases

near residential areas, despite the fact that Jewish leaders have consistently accused Palestinian and Lebanese factions like Hamas and Hezbollah of operating from among centers with civilian populations, endangering the residents there, and using them as human shields.

“The reality is that a significant number of Israeli military and intelligence bases operate near, and sometimes even within, populated areas,” he added, which is like the pot calling the kettle black.

These military bases carry significant risks and danger to the civilian populations who are living within the vicinity of such installations, he concluded.

Marwan Asmar is a writer from Amman and blogs for crossfirearabia.com

News

Zamir: Israel May Resume War on All ‘Active Fronts’

CrossFireArabia
April 29, 2026

Israeli Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir said Monday that intense fighting could resume across all of Israel’s active fronts this year according to the Drop Site website.

“We remain ready and on alert for the possibility of a resumption of intense fighting on all these fronts—2026 could still be a year of fighting on each of them,” Zamir told army officers during a meeting. I

In an interview with Fox News on Monday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio declined to say whether the Trump administration would support Israel resuming the war in Gaza, but said that “the entirety of this project only works if Hamas is demilitarized.”

Hamas has consistently refused to discuss disarmament until Israel ceases its violations of the ceasefire and fulfills its Phase One obligations according to Drop Site.

Opinion

US-Iran: Who Will Blink First!

Dr Khairi Janbek
April 24, 2026

One would say that our main inheritance from the Covid period is the term, new normal, which has been since used, conveniently, in any circumstance we found baffling to our senses.

So one wonders if the stand in Hormuz will not be our current new normal, which will mean putting up with the economic consequences of the blockage and trying at the same time to find different routes for trade. Here, one is talking economics and trade simply because the loss of life and destruction doesn’t more matter in comparison to budgets and the flow of goods.

In fact each time anyone finds an intelligent reason for this ongoing conflict, the rediculous actions of the protagonists proves the impossibility of saying an informed or otherwise opinion. For all intents and purposes, all what can be reasonably said, is that for now, the war is supposed to be inconclusive despite the threats flying around, because essentially no one wants a regime change in Iran because no one can predict the consequences.

Therefore, back to economics again, the strategy seems, who will blink first and accept the conditions of the other to return to Islamabad. Iran with its enormous financial and economic problems which fears a new uprising in the streets once the stalemate with the US becomes the norm, or the USA with the mid term elections looming, rising inflation and higher energy prices, as well as volatility in stocks and shares prices in Wall Street.

When it comes to the situation in Lebanon, clearly the link with Iran is in fact Hizbullah; which is by its own admission the Party of Veliyati -Fatih in Lebanon, under the current circumstances, with the Israeli invasion of the south of Lebanon, for the first time in the history of Lebanon, not a sect, religious community, or power group, but in fact the official state representatives are talking about direct negotiations with Israel for peace, and in fact negotiating directly with each other in Washington.

For the Lebanese state, the situation now is legitimacy over the whole geography of the country, and limiting the possession of arms only in the hands of the Lebanese army and security. However, here also we face the scenario of whether the egg comes first, which is for Hizbullah Israeli withdrawal first, or the chicken, for the Lebanese government to negotiate the withdrawal of Israel.

Leaving the devil out of the details, would it mean ultimately, that a diplomatic agreement between Lebanon and Israel makes Hizbullah the enemy of both Israel and the Lebanese state together?, and what would the Lebanese state do as a next step, if Hizbullah decides to keep its weapons?

Then of course, there is the festering wound of Gaza and the West Bank which hardly warrant any news considering the scale of what is going on in the Gulf and in Lebanon. For Gaza, the vision fluctuates between lost peace, Israeli occupation withdrawn yellow lines, and Hamas with its show of force, amidst refugees, squalor, destruction and whether aid can go in or not, while on the other hand AI generated images of its rise beach resorts which no one is likely, from now on, be able to think about even if they can afford and realize them.

Future? What can one say save for bleak.

As for the West Bank, one has to apologise for saying that the Arabs, before anyone else, are reconciled with idea that the PNA is no longer there, apart from of course, moneymaking, here and there, and that what is termed as Palestinian territory will become a Bantustan in the sea of expanded Israel. Thus where do we go from here, well, there are people with paid salaries to think about!

Janbek is a Jordanian columnist based in Paris