Where is Iran going?

In an impassioned speech, US President Donald Trump declared that "the goal was to cripple Iran's ability to enrich uranium and to eliminate the nuclear threat," and that the strike was carried out in full coordination with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was quick to boast that "the primary objective of the operation was achieved by destroying the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan facilities," as if three airstrikes were enough to close a nuclear file that had been built over two decades.

After Trump fulfilled his promise, and amid a wave of euphoria that swept across Israel and some Middle Eastern countries, crucial questions began to emerge: What about the half-ton of enriched uranium that was apparently transferred from the Fordow facility to another location? And how can this war be ended after the United States, for the first time in its history, effectively joined the Israeli military attack against Iran?

At this time, Iran finds itself in stifling isolation following the US strike. Despite condemnation from both Russia and China, they are unable to offer a military response or a real diplomatic umbrella. Meanwhile, the positions of Tehran's allies are hesitant. Hezbollah in Lebanon and Shiite factions in Iraq have limited themselves to statements of condemnation, emphasizing the ability of the "strong Iranian state" to confront the threat. Only the Houthis have announced the suspension of the ceasefire agreement with the United States, without carrying out any attacks so far.

Over the past years, Iran has invested in its nuclear program, a network of allies, the so-called axis of resistance, and a unified front, from Syria, Lebanon, and Palestine to Iraq and Yemen. Despite its participation in negotiations with major powers, Iran has held on to its "strategic asset," its nuclear program, and refused to abandon it, especially after Trump withdrew from the nuclear agreement in 2018.

Since 2021, Iran has resumed enriching uranium at high levels, and the escalation intensified after a series of Israeli strikes targeting the Natanz facility and prominent leaders of the Axis of Resistance, most notably Hassan Nasrallah. In the second half of 2024, with the fall of the Assad regime in Damascus, Iranian concerns rose, and Tehran responded by enriching uranium to 60%—a step closer to the threshold for a nuclear weapon, though it has not yet reached it.

Operation "People Like a Lioness," which was launched ten days ago, quickly transformed from a preemptive strike into an open war. According to Israeli media, four main objectives were identified for the operation: destroying Iran's nuclear program, crippling its ballistic missile capabilities, striking the axis of resistance, and imposing long-term political deterrence. Some Israeli officials have even spoken openly about the possibility of "overthrowing the Iranian regime" or even assassinating Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, whom Defense Minister Israel Katz has described as "the Hitler of our time."

The fundamental question today is: Will a major American strike push the Iranians to make concessions? Or, on the contrary, will it push them toward further hardline stances? The Iranians view their nuclear program as a "protective umbrella" preventing hostile forces from overthrowing the regime. From their perspective, abandoning it would be tantamount to political suicide.

Haaretz quotes security sources as saying that "the American bet on destroying nuclear facilities as a means of bringing Iran to the negotiating table may be a mistake." The Iranians have long experience with patience and are adept at long-term competitions. Despite their relatively diminished military capabilities, they still retain real threat tools: from missiles and drones to the possibility of striking US bases or closing the Strait of Hormuz, a scenario that would shake the global economy and harm China and Washington's allies in the Gulf.

Since the Iranian revolution in 1979, the Iranian regime's primary goal has been survival. It has successfully weathered a devastating war with Iraq, repeated waves of protests, and stifling international sanctions, remaining resilient. Today, it seeks to wage a calculated battle to ensure its survival, in a volatile regional landscape that has become a "ring of fire" that is difficult to break.

Betting that Tehran's clerics will place their future in the hands of an American president, whether Trump or Obama, seems naive. Unless Iran is completely stripped of its nuclear option, it will remain both a threatened and a threatened actor. To this moment, no one knows how this short American campaign will end, nor whether the Middle East will truly breathe freely from the conflicts over the Arab region, its people neglected, American-Israeli arrogance, and excess power, or whether it will witness a postponed nuclear explosion.