
Not the Iran we thought it was — what has changed in the Persian Gulf?
On paper, it looked like a mismatch. Iran is not only one of the oldest and most established countries in the Persian Gulf but also at least 75 times the size of Israel, with a population nine to 10 times larger. Size for size, it's a modern-day David and Goliath match-up, with ancient history squarely on Iran's side.
At the height of its reign, especially under Cyrus the Great (559-530 BC), the Persian Empire, modern-day Iran, extended as far as Egypt, and its military might was unassailable. In more contemporary times, Iran defended itself against the aggression of Saddam Hussein during the eight-year Iran-Iraq War.
Sudden tide
Yet, since 12 June 2025, when Israel struck Iran's nuclear site and killed at least 14 atomic scientists and 16 top military officers, Iran's response has been something of a damp squib. A leaked intelligence report by the White House suggests that, but for US President Donald Trump's intervention, Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, might have been killed in the recent Israeli strikes.
In response, a barrage of Iranian missiles was fired on Tel Aviv and Haifa, with civilian casualties. Perhaps this has been the most significant dent in Israel's defence system in the last five decades. However, the response has been far below the notion of Iran as a nation of warriors and the potential nemesis of its precocious neighbour, especially after the fall of Syria's Hafez al-Assad.
Things got so bad for Tehran that, at one point, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu even claimed that Israel was 'in full control of the Iranian skies', which Tehran could not deny.
What happened?
How did mighty Iran lose its military footing so calamitously? The weakening of Iran's military strength is not as sudden as it appears.
It is the result of years of isolation and economic sanctions, driven mainly by three suspicions: One, that the Shia variety of Islam (and its allied franchises) subscribed to by Iran's ruling elite is the mainstay of radical and extremist terror groups; two, that it is the main sponsor of at least two radical Islamic groups and arch-enemies of Israel — Hamas (in Gaza) and Hezbollah (in Lebanon); and three, that its nuclear enrichment programme is not for peace, but for war.
All three points are interlinked, and by 2015, the lack of progress on the third one saw the imposition of economic sanctions by the US, Britain and France, among others, targeting and undermining Iran's receipts from oil sales and weakening its economy.
But Iran remained a major military force despite the sanctions. It cultivated closer ties with China and Russia, made desperate attempts to diversify its economy and used fronts to sell its oil.
Burden of history
All this time, Netanyahu wanted to strike. He pressured the US to tighten the screws on Tehran and maybe back a pre-emptive Israeli strike, but his repeated claim that Iran was only 'months … or even weeks' from the final stages of getting the bomb, was met with scepticism, if not indifference, by the Democratic White House.
After the debacle in Iraq, where the US lost more than 900 troops and spent over $2-trillion based on faulty intelligence that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, no Democratic president, whether Barack Obama or Joe Biden, had the appetite for another full-scale war in the Persian Gulf without a convincing reason.
Then, two events altered the dynamics of power and politics in the Persian Gulf.
Hamas, long regarded as Iran's proxy, attacked Israel on 7 October 2023, killing about 1,200 people and abducting more than 250. This act of terror not only transformed moderate elements in Israeli politics, it also further hardened extremists like Netanyahu, who vowed to crush Hamas and Hezbollah and make Iran pay a heavy price.
Trump factor
When Trump was elected president, one year after the Israeli-Hamas war broke out, his brand of tweet-and-deal-making diplomacy, not to mention his close ties with Netanyahu, meant that Iran was on very thin ice. The stalemate in negotiations between Iran and the nuclear inspectors, including the expulsion of the veteran International Atomic Energy Agency officials, further raised suspicions about Iran's claims that its nuclear programme was for peaceful purposes.
Yet some argued that Tehran's reluctance to cooperate and its rigmarole were merely bargaining chips to ease sanctions and repair its moribund economy, that it was still a long way from the bomb.
Even though The Wall Street Journal reported recently that US intelligence still doubted Netanyahu's claims about Iran's nuclear enrichment, Tehran appears to have played all its cards, and the days of the old regime may be numbered.
Pre-emptive or not?
With Trump mulling direct US involvement in the war, I asked a source in the Israeli Foreign Ministry on Monday, 23 June whether the US bombing of Iran was a pre-emptive strike, a move that the Nigerian government had condemned in a statement.
'It is not a pre-emptive strike,' the source replied. 'It is a targeted military operation to remove a concrete threat after the pre-established period of negotiations has elapsed. The objectives have been set: the nuclear programme and the ballistic capabilities.'
What has changed
Here is how Israel systematically weakened and significantly degraded Iran's military capacity, especially in the last two years, forcing the mullahs in Tehran to shelter behind the veil in what may prove to be a decisive new phase in the war in one of the world's most troubled regions.
One, Iran's regional allies — Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Al-Assad in Syria — have either been neutralised, rooted out or forced to flee. The pager attack by Israel on Hezbollah members and affiliates in Lebanon and Syria last September was particularly devastating. At least 42 people were killed and 3,500 injured when their booby-trapped pagers exploded, revealing a major breach in Hezbollah's security, causing panic in high places in Iran.
Although the Houthis of Yemen have occasionally threatened security in the region, they have also been significantly contained or dispersed, making Iran even more isolated and vulnerable.
Two, Israel has carried out precise strikes on Iran's military leadership, assassinating, among others, the chief of the general staff of Iran's armed forces, General Mohammad Hossein Bagheri, who was only a heartbeat from Supreme Leader Khamenei.
The country's air defence system has been degraded, and even though it has managed to fire hundreds of missiles toward Israel, their potency and impact have been largely limited.
Third, the economic sanctions have limited Tehran's ability to modernise its military. At the same time, support from its main ally, Russia, has been curtailed by Russia's ongoing war with Ukraine, leaving Tehran largely on its own.
Unlikely mediators
It's an irony that, in its moment of travail, Iran is now looking to Qatar and Egypt, two countries that it has long despised, for mediation with Israel and the US. Netanyahu still has to answer for the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, and hopefully, that should keep him on a tight leash.
After centuries of military, cultural and geopolitical conquests, is the sun finally about to set on the 'Gunpowder Empire?' Or is there still one magic spell left under the mullahs' turbans? DM

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

IOL News
21 minutes ago
- IOL News
How US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities changed the landscape of conflict
Experts say the US has been thrown into the conflict against Iran based on fake information about the latter's nuclear facilities. Image: Atta Kenare / AFP The recent US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities have sparked intense debate, with the focus shifting from the act of aggression itself to the scale of destruction inflicted on Iran's nuclear program. US President Donald Trump initially claimed the damage was "monumental" and that the nuclear sites were "obliterated." However, the Pentagon's own report suggests that the damage was less severe, setting back Iran's nuclear program by only three months. The discrepancy between Trump's claims and the Pentagon's report has raised questions about the accuracy of the damage assessment. While Trump claimed to be happy about the damage, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley, reportedly said that the US strikes inflicted "extremely severe damage and destruction" on Iran's nuclear facilities, but the extent of the damage is still being assessed. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ The US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities have deepened the conflict in the Middle East, and the international community is waiting to see how the situation unfolds. Disagreement over the extent of the damage has raised questions about the effectiveness of the US strategy and the potential consequences for the region from experts. International relations expert Bruce Spector noted that there are "a couple of things that must be focused on, including the disagreement over the extent of the damage". "The Pentagon's intelligence agency's leaked report said the damage was rather less significant than a number of other organisations internationally had said," Spector said. "What we need to concentrate on is what happens going forward. Will the Iranians finally start rebuilding a nuclear program? And if they do, is it headed toward the creation of a bomb or a nuclear device?" Spector thinks the best way to evaluate the situation is to look at what happens next. "If Iran's program has been decimated or obliterated, then there isn't much point cooperating because there isn't much of a program to cooperate over," he said. "If that's a kind of a threat to allow the Iranians to begin to reconstitute their program, that's a whole different thing altogether." Spector noted that there are 18 different organisations in the US that focus on different aspects of information gathering, and they have yet to offer their analysis. "A lot of it will be second-hand intelligence…"It will be a while until we have a consensus on this,' Spector said. Meanwhile North Korea has since 'strongly' condemned the US strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities as a grave violation of a sovereign state's security interests and territorial rights, the North's state media reported. The US and Israel are the culprits of the current tensions in the Middle East born out of Jerusalem's "ceaseless war moves and territorial expansion" accepted and encouraged by the West," North Korea's foreign ministry said. "North Korea strongly denounces the attack on Iran by the US which ... violently trampled down the territorial integrity and security interests of a sovereign state. "The just international community should raise the voice of unanimous censure and rejection against the US and Israel's confrontational acts," the statement added.

TimesLIVE
31 minutes ago
- TimesLIVE
Cabinet urges de-escalation in Israel-Iran conflict
Cabinet has raised concern about conflict between Israel and Iran, intensified by recent US air strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, urging the countries to turn to the negotiating table. Speaking on behalf of the cabinet after a meeting on Wednesday, minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni called for peace as the conflict has claimed lives in both countries, with hundreds injured. 'Cabinet calls for an urgent de-escalation of hostilities and full compliance with international law by all parties to prevent further human suffering. 'Cabinet further calls on the US, Israel and Iran to create room for constructive dialogue and give the UN the opportunity to lead the peaceful resolution of disputes.' Listen to cabinet message:

IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
The Truth Behind the US and Israel's Military Strikes on Iran
US military claims victory in strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. Image: AFP The United States of America is applauding itself for its strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites. This is despite evidence that the Middle Eastern country was not developing nuclear weapons. Even if Iran was developing such armaments, why do the two states want to deter this? Additionally, the US which is the only nation in the world that has used two nuclear bombs, killing hundreds of thousands of people has appointed itself as the arbiter of which countries should or should not have them. Civil nuclear engineer expert Hugo Kruger said that the official position of the intelligence agencies, the CIA, Mossad, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is that Iran does not have a weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programme. "Iran however has a civilian nuclear programme and a policy of strategic ambiguity. It does enrich uranium, but there is no serious bomb programme under construction. There is a long history around this going back to the Iran-Iraq war when Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons on Iran. "As a consequence, when Ayatollah Khomeini came to power, he put fatwa (religious ruling), against WMDs, that is to say chemical and nuclear weapons," said Kruger. More than a decade ago, Khomeini asserted that Iran would not be building nuclear weapons. "Nuclear weapons neither ensure security, nor do they consolidate political power, rather they are a threat to both security and political power. "The events that took place in the 1990s showed that the possession of such weapons could not even safeguard a regime like the former Soviet Union. And today we see certain countries which are exposed to waves of deadly insecurity despite possessing atomic bombs," Khomeini said. Kruger pointed out that Israel is hypocritical as it is reported to have between 100 and 200 nuclear weapons, and Benjamin Netanyahu is related, for example, to the Uranium Smuggling Mafia (smugglers of uranium and plutonium). This is according to the FBI's declassified Institute for Research: Middle Eastern Policy files. "As for Israel, I do not believe that they have done anything significant, the real nuclear technology is in the head of Iranians, and they have domesticated it. Meaning even if they bomb the place to ashes, the people will be able to rebuild it, because they have human capital," Kruger said. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading For political analyst, Siyabonga Ntombela, Israel and the US don't think Iran should have nuclear weapons because it poses existential threat for both countries. "No country deserves to be bombed especially if they have not used the nuclear weapons at all. The US claims to promote democratic ideals and it is in such times that those beliefs are put to the test. International diplomatic engagements must ensue to ensure minimum casualties and unnecessary loss of lives," Ntombela argued. Ntombela went on to say that the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (an international treaty aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology), must be understood and executed in an open and fearless manner for all countries, both with and without nuclear capability. "Israel has nuclear (weapons), why does it have it and other surrounding states do not have? Is it for self-preservation? Possibly but how do other states who would like to be safe view this double standard." Trump also appears to have undermined his own intelligence intel. In March, the US' Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, reported before Congress that the Middle Eastern country was far from the capability of building a nuclear bomb. "The Intelligence Community (IC) continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Khomeinei has not authorised the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003... Iran's enriched uranium stockpile is at its highest levels and unprecedented for a state without nuclear weapons," Gabbard said.