The current armed conflict orchestrated by the United States and Israel against Iran is not simply another flare-up in a volatile region, but a dramatic unfolding of the US National Security Strategy (NSS) 2025. Under this strategy, Washington has shifted focus towards fortifying its own core strategic interests – securing the Western Hemisphere, compelling allies to assume responsibility for their own defence, using economic leverage as a security tool, and intervening abroad only where vital American primacy is threatened. This war, therefore, reflects a broader strategic recalibration rather than an isolated military decision.
Central to NSS 2025 is the demand that allies bear the primary burden of regional security. For decades, the US carried much of the global security load across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia. In Europe, this has now translated into persistent pressure on NATO members to raise defence spending. In East Asia, countries such as Japan and South Korea have expanded their own military budgets and capabilities. The aim is to distribute the cost of deterrence more equitably so that US forces can be strategically concentrated where they matter most.
As NSS underscores, the US moved decisively to secure its own strategic ‘backyard’ to tackle challenges ranging from mass migration and drug flows from Mexico to destabilising regimes and powerful cartels in Venezuela, Colombia, Cuba and Ecuador which forced Washington to act. Strategic vulnerabilities such as Chinese-linked infrastructure around the Panama Canal, emerging Arctic routes near Alaska, and broader Chinese commercial penetration, port acquisitions, satellite facilities, and resource diplomacy across Latin America have prompted a mix of direct military action and coercive diplomacy to protect US interests in this region.
For years, Iran has functioned as a regional pressure point against Israel and the US, leveraging its proxy architecture across Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen; threatening Gulf shipping with missiles; launching drone attacks and disrupting vital energy corridors. Beyond the military dimension, Iran’s deep economic interlinkages with China particularly through discounted oil exports and technological cooperation enabled Tehran to withstand Western sanctions and reinforced its geopolitical resilience. This strategic recalibration is evident in the direct US military action against Iran through Operation Epic Fury, following Israel initiated Operation Rising Lion.
The joint combat operations reflect a calibrated assertion of selective dominance aimed at destroying Iran’s war-waging and nuclear capability, ending the ruling regime, limiting the strategic space available to China, and reinforcing a credible deterrent posture. The operations were preceded by negotiations that created diplomatic space while allowing forces to be positioned and intelligence to mature. Beneath the visible air campaign, Israel’s intelligence-driven surgical actions systematically targeted religious leadership, nuclear scientists, senior military leaders, and proxy commanders.
This time Iran was not caught unprepared, having learnt lessons from the 12-day war in June 2025. In response, Tehran has expanded its retaliatory strikes targeting US bases in Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Cyprus; bombing energy infrastructure in Saudi Arabia and Qatar; striking airports, desalination plants, residential districts in parts of the Gulf; and attacking Israel and US carrier battle groups. Iran’s capacity to continue fighting despite significant leadership losses demonstrates that decapitation alone does not ensure systemic collapse and selective intervention carries inherent risks of escalation.
The persistence of the conflict raises difficult questions whether the likely objectives of the operations can be achieved i.e. dismantling Iran’s war waging capability, halting its nuclear ambitions, precipitating regime change and protecting American interests, each with distinct implications and consequences for the region and the global order.
If the principal aim is to dismantle Iran’s war waging capability, then the objective may be partially achieved as precision airstrikes and intelligence-driven sabotage will degrade missile launch infrastructure, drone and missile storage depots, AD and command systems over a period. However, this degradation has resulted in retaliatory strikes by Iran causing immense collateral impact, disrupted trade routes, higher energy prices meaning that tactical success comes at the cost of strategic turbulence.
If the objective is to halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions, the outcome suggests that overt military action can further harden nuclear resolve. The lesson other states draw is that nuclear deterrence prevents attacks as can be seen in the case of North Korea. These strikes would accelerate nuclear ambitions of not only Iran but of other regional actors fundamentally altering the region’s security architecture.
If regime change was the objective, eliminating senior leadership creates further disruption. The killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will intensify anti-US and anti-Israel sentiment amongst hardline factions, unify proxy networks, and deepen regional polarisation. Also, the leadership vacuum will trigger internal power struggles within Iran’s clergy and security establishment, creating longer-term uncertainty and instability. Also, it is evident that socially engineered protests do not automatically translate into stable political transformation. Iran’s threat perception will translate into higher regional defence expenditure across the Gulf and beyond, a development which benefits the US defence industry even as broader geopolitical uncertainty persists.
Whether this strategy will succeed depends on outcomes still uncertain. Can Iran’s capabilities be degraded without triggering wider regional war? Can China be strategically constrained without direct confrontation? The current war is the first real testing ground for NSS 2025.
(Brigadier (Retd) Anil John Alfred Pereira is a veteran from Goa, who served the nation with distinction for 32 years.)
