The conclusion of the four month long conflict between the United States and Iran has sparked an intense global debate regarding which nation emerged as the true victor. While military engagements have ceased following a negotiated agreement, the assessment of success remains divided between tactical military achievements and long-term strategic outcomes. US President Donald Trump has characterized the agreement that ended the hostilities as a significant triumph for American interests, while however, a diverse group of 10 military and foreign policy experts, surveyed by the American magazine Newsweek, offers a more nuanced and often contradictory perspective on the war results.
The Military Toll on Iran
From a purely kinetic and military standpoint, the conflict resulted in substantial devastation for the Islamic Republic of Iran. Joint operations by the United States and Israel inflicted severe damage on Iran military infrastructure, while reports indicate that the Iranian Navy was nearly decimated, and the Air Force suffered significant losses. On top of that, the nation missile production capabilities and its controversial nuclear program faced major setbacks due to targeted strikes. The human cost for the Iranian leadership was also high, with several high-ranking military officials and political figures losing their lives during the four months of intense fighting. Despite these crippling blows, the Iranian government managed to remain in power, a fact that many experts point to as a fundamental strategic success for Tehran.
Strategic Gains for the Iranian Regime
Burcu Ozcelik, an expert from the London-based Royal United Services Institute, suggests that the primary beneficiary of this war wasn't the Iranian public, but rather the ruling elite. According to Ozcelik, the conflict has served to strengthen the position of hardline factions within the Iranian government. On top of that, the war sent a significant message to global powers like China and Russia, demonstrating that American military might doesn't always translate into definitive political success, while this resilience in the face of overwhelming force has allowed the regime to consolidate its domestic authority despite the external pressure.
Leverage and Concessions
Professor Melanie Garson of University College London provides another perspective on Iran perceived victory. She notes that Iran can now claim to have withstood the full military pressure of the United States and Israel while maintaining its strategic influence over the Strait of Hormuz. In the aftermath of the conflict, Iran has managed to secure several concessions as part of the peace process. These include the acquisition of funds for reconstruction, relief from certain international sanctions, and the return of previously frozen assets. From this viewpoint, Iran ability to trade its survival for economic and political relief constitutes a strategic win.
The Perspective of No Clear Winner
Not all experts agree that a clear winner can be identified. Former Pentagon official Jim Townsend and Michael O Hanlon of the Brookings Institution argue that the war resulted in a stalemate where both sides suffered significant setbacks, while while the United States demonstrated its military superiority, its global image took a hit. Conversely, while Iran survived, its economy and military capabilities were severely weakened, while mark Cancian from the Center for Strategic and International Studies acknowledges that the US is in a better position in some respects, having destroyed the Iranian navy and set back its nuclear program by years. However, he also admits that Iran continues to maintain its influence through its remaining missile and drone technology and its presence in the Strait of Hormuz.
Unfulfilled American Objectives
A critical point raised by several experts is that the United States failed to achieve its most ambitious goals. The agreement that ended the war didn't provide a definitive solution to Iran ballistic missile program or its support for regional proxy organizations. Most importantly, the objective of regime change, which many in the US administration had hoped for, wasn't realized. Because the Iranian leadership remains intact and continues to exert regional influence, many analysts conclude that while the US won the battles, it may not have won the war. This complex outcome leaves the international community questioning the long-term stability of the region and the true effectiveness of the military campaign.