168: US-Iran military escalation continues. A manageable crisis scenario?

In the early morning of July 18, the military operations carried out by the US Central Command (CENTCOM) entered a new and more comprehensive phase, leaving the borders of the Strait of Hormuz and spreading towards the central and southern regions of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The military campaign, now in its seventh day, is aimed at the systematic weakening of Iran’s military infrastructure, including surveillance and intelligence facilities, underground arsenals and naval capabilities. The operation, which included the use of both fighter jets and drones, essentially paralyzed strategic traffic in the Strait of Hormuz in response to Iranian missile strikes aimed at regional allies in the Persian Gulf.

Iranian state media confirmed the geographic expansion of the attacks, reporting strikes in Yazd, Ahvaz and Khuzestan provinces, as well as the destruction of infrastructure facilities, particularly bridges and airports, in southern Iran.

The situation is aggravated by Tehran’s harsh rhetoric. Major General Mohsen Rezai, a military adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, has announced the possibility of launching a large-scale offensive, noting that in the event of further military escalation, Iran will no longer be limited to its current countermeasures and that “no political border will be safe.” This statement indicates a qualitative change in the confrontation, where each side claims a strategic initiative, endangering the entire regional security architecture.

168.amin a conversation with Russian analyst Vladimir Yevseyev said that the continuation of military operations and the threat of Iran to go to “large-scale offensive operations” dictate two main scenarios for the escalation of the conflict. According to him, the first is the intensification of military conflicts involving the territory of the Persian Gulf states, which can lead to a collapse in the global energy market and large-scale regional instability. The second, according to him, is the activation by Iran of its “proxy” forces throughout the Middle East, which will force the US to expand the geography of its targets, threatening Tehran’s stability.

Vladimir Yevseyev believes that these processes are fraught not only with direct military losses, but also with the formation of new geopolitical alliances and active geopolitical processes.

“For the South Caucasus, this confrontation carries existential risks, given the close connection of the region with Iran. The deepening of the conflict could lead to a sharp shift of attention and resources from Iran’s southern borders to the north. Destabilization or military exhaustion of Iran will weaken its deterrent role in the South Caucasus. As a result, the region becomes a new theater of conflict between the interests of great powers, where the role of Iran as a reliable neighbor for Armenia may come under serious test. However, it is not excluded that Iran will also conduct a vigilant policy in this direction, taking into account all possible risks, including the risk that Iran sees with the future American presence in the South Caucasus,” said Vladimir Yevseyev.

According to him, the prolongation of this military conflict is limited by the internal political agenda of the USA, in particular, the upcoming elections, which make the confrontation with Iran sensitive for Washington.

“The White House needs to avoid getting involved in a large-scale and uncontrolled war that could significantly damage the standing of the ruling administration and destabilize global energy markets right before the vote. Therefore, the intensity of operations will most likely be for a limited period of time, which means that the security vacuum created for the South Caucasus or the weakening of Iran’s positions may not be a long-term strategic change, but a “managed crisis”.

However, even this short-term escalation is enough for regional actors to try to calculate their risks and make the most of Iran’s time under domestic pressure. Iran, of course, conducts a deterrent policy also in the South Caucasus, at the same time, it has prepared for a long-term positioning internally, realizing that it is not easy to reach agreements with the USA that will be long-lasting and stable,” said Vladimir Yevseyev.

As for the theme of restarting the “3 3” format, the analyst believes that there is nothing new about this issue.

“There is still no interest in the region to work in this format,” he said.

—