Iran? Asymmetric resistance or self-immolation?

By: Beatrice E. Rangel - 04/03/2026

After experiencing the decapitation of its leadership, the destruction of its navy, and the dismantling of its missile and drone factories, what remains of the theocratic regime established in Iran in 1979 is a strategy of asymmetric resistance aimed at achieving the least bad outcome of the conflict. This involves enduring greater damage, high costs, and/or short-term losses to break the enemy's political will or economic capacity to continue the fight, or both. This is why—despite the bombing carried out and ongoing by Israel and the United States—Iran continues to launch missiles and drones against strategic targets such as US embassies in the Gulf region, ports and airports in that same region, and the Strait of Hormuz. The goal is to force the attackers to maintain the pace of aggression until their supplies and the political will that sustains the war against Iran are exhausted. In other words, it's about prolonging the conflict, expanding the battlefield, and making the cost of war prohibitive for the stronger opponent. In Israel's specific case, the aim is to saturate the air defense system known as the Sky Shield, causing harm to the civilian population so that they will oppose the conflict. Iran is betting that domestic public opinion will end the aggression. While the cost of this strategy is extremely high, it has two advantages. It allows for the reconfiguration of internal leadership, which has been decimated by Israeli-American bombing, thus creating a core of power that prevents any future surrender from being a surrender on its knees.

In this sense, it is an extremely costly plan to allow the formation of a new leadership after the annihilation by the United States and Israel of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the three immediate circles of power in the country under a barrage of bombings. Following this mass decapitation, the system needs to rebuild its forces in order to negotiate the new status quo, even if it is worse than the ante bellum status quo. This explains the evident escalation of the conflict, in which Iran has literally bombarded Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE with drones and missiles.

The problem with this strategy arises when assessing Iran's arsenal and its duration. Apparently, Iran has missiles and drones to maintain the current pace of hostilities for two months. However, this only covers the depots and factories of defense equipment located within Iran. There are drone and missile factories in countries within Russia's sphere of influence that could meet Iran's needs. But financial sanctions prevent this resource from being utilized; since it cannot be replenished through these channels, Iran could end up negotiating its surrender from a weaker position than it currently occupies. In fact, China has already expressed its displeasure with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. It's worth remembering that 80% of Iranian oil goes to Asia. The Emirates, which until now had remained neutral, indicated their intention to respond to the aggression, and the United States, which initially stated through its president that this military operation would only take four to five weeks, is now saying that it is expected to last for three months. But even under these circumstances, Iran could be paralyzed before its rivals. In this case, it would be a self-immolation and not an asymmetric defense strategy.

«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».