An Israeli Reading of Iranian Tactics: Betting on Trump Avoiding War and a Struggle Between Factions in Tehran

Israeli military analyst Yoav Limor believes that the current war policy has led to a loss of Israeli control on several fronts, noting that Tehran is now boasting about what it considers strategic achievements. Limor explained that Tel Aviv is still chasing an elusive concept of complete victory, the same path that led military operations in the Gaza Strip to a dead end without achieving clear ultimate goals.

In an analytical article published by Israel Hayom, Limor pointed out that the Iranian leadership has developed a firm conviction that it has overcome the most difficult stage of international pressure. This conviction is based on a mix of religious ideology and a realistic analysis of the balance of power, as Tehran believes that sanctions and internal protests have not succeeded in breaking the state's will or changing its major orientations.

The Israeli analyst believes that Tehran thinks it can withstand longer than its adversaries, betting on what it calls strategic patience, which will ultimately force the other party to surrender. This Iranian perception goes beyond direct military power to a deep understanding of the nature of political transformations in the United States, Israel, and the Gulf states, which reinforces their confidence in the current path.

The analysis touched upon the updated Western view of Iran's governance structure, where it is no longer seen as a monolithic bloc led by a single decision, but rather as a group of interconnected centers of gravity. These centers communicate and intersect in interests at times, while experiencing sharp differences in views on how to deal with hot international issues, which complicates intelligence efforts in predicting future steps.

According to Israeli and American intelligence estimates, a pragmatic current is emerging in the Iranian scene, led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad Ghalibaf. This current clearly seeks to resume negotiation tracks with the international community, driven by a genuine fear of the country sliding into an all-out war that could lead to irreparable economic and structural damage.

In contrast, a radical hardline current appears, led by senior officials in the security apparatus, most notably leaders in the Revolutionary Guard and the Supreme National Security Council. This faction rejects making any fundamental concessions to Western powers, believing that any retreat will be understood as weakness leading to more pressure, preferring the option of indirect confrontation and strengthening regional power cards.

Between these two currents, the role of the Supreme Leader stands out, described as the safety valve and balancer between the warring powers within the corridors of power. According to Limor, the decision-making process at this level is characterized by slowness and ambiguity, with communication occurring through memos and envoys, which often makes Iranian responses to international initiatives late and indecisive.

10. The Israeli analyst believes that Iran is convinced that US President Donald Trump will do his utmost to avoid returning to direct wars in the Middle East. This perception gives Tehran a wider margin for maneuver, as it assumes that Washington will be content with economic pressure or limited strikes without entering into an open military conflict that drains its resources.

11. The article indicates that Israel's failure to resolve the conflict in Gaza has given Iran and its allies a sense of ability to challenge traditional military superiority. The continuous search for the image of victory promoted by the political level in Israel has not translated into a strategic reality that changes the rules of the game, but rather has led to a long-term attrition that serves Iranian interests in the region.

12. Limor also noted that the coordination between power centers in Iran, despite their differences, serves the interest of preserving the regime and expanding its regional influence. The disagreement between pragmatists and radicals may be in the means, not in the ultimate goals, which makes it difficult for external powers to bet on an internal split that would lead to a radical change in foreign policy.

13. The analysis concluded that Israel finds itself facing a complex reality that requires a comprehensive re-evaluation of its strategy towards Iran. The confrontation is no longer limited to military aspects, but has extended to include a war of wills and long patience, amid a growing Iranian conviction that time is on its side and that adversaries will eventually retreat in the face of Tehran's insistence.

14. Iran is convinced that it is invincible and that everything is going in its favor, and this stems from many reasons, some religious stemming from a firm belief, and others practical stemming from a precise analysis of the situation.