The political dynamic in the Middle East currently stands before one of its most complex questions: Can the Iranian regime be subdued through external pressure?
While the West, led by the Trump administration, at times adopts an approach of “maximum pressure,” an analysis of the internal reality in Tehran presents a grim picture of a regime that does not see surrender as a viable option, not only because of ideology, but because of a basic instinct for physical survival.
For the Revolutionary Guards, power is not merely a tool for realizing a religious vision, but the last line of defense against annihilation. The men of the current regime, more extreme than their predecessors, understand very well that their downfall would not end in a democratic transfer of power or a quiet retirement. From their point of view, the loss of power means personal persecution, prosecution, and the physical elimination of the ruling stratum.
This perception turns the struggle into a zero-sum game. Even if Iran is destroyed, its electricity and water infrastructure collapses, and its oil and gas industry is completely shut down, the regime will continue to fight. A food shortage or the economic collapse of the population does not constitute grounds for a leadership that sees itself as engaged in a war for survival. From its point of view, it is preferable that “the world burn” than that it lose its grip on power.
Here lies the built-in failure in the strategy of US President Trump. The attempt to subdue Iran through sanctions or military action creates destructive global side effects.
Faced with heavy pressure from home and abroad, Trump may find himself forced to declare a “total victory” without achieving his goals, the most important of which is the eradication of the extremist rule of the Revolutionary Guards.
Alternatively, he may settle for temporary compromises regarding freedom of navigation, a delay in Iran’s nuclearization, and renewed restrictions on its missile capabilities. This would create a situation in which international pressure, whether in the form of agreements, sanctions, or military threats, succeeds only in temporarily halting the Iranian clock, without dismantling the infrastructure itself.
Such an outcome may be interpreted as a diplomatic achievement, but in practice, it would only postpone the end without neutralizing the core threats: the missile array, the nuclear program, and support for proxies throughout the region.
For the State of Israel, this scenario carries a long-term strategic danger. Ending the war without dismantling Iran’s capabilities means Tehran’s rapid return to a path of accelerated rearmament. While Iran rebuilds its strength, Israel may in the future find itself facing a different United States, one whose priorities have changed, especially in the post-Trump era, when voices within the Democratic Party are already calling for reduced involvement and support in the Middle East.
In conclusion, the power of the Revolutionary Guards regime is measured not only by its weapons but by its absolute unwillingness to compromise on its own existence. As long as the regime sees surrender as a death sentence, conventional political and economic tools will remain limited in their effectiveness, and the threat to global stability and Israel’s security will only intensify.
All the forecasts I wrote before the ceasefire was declared were fully realized, one by one. We stood moments before the expiration of the ultimatum that Trump had set for the Iranians, and on the eve of launching a broad attack intended to destroy the electricity, water, bridge, and gas and oil infrastructure of the Islamic Republic. On the morning of April 7, 2026, Eastern US time, Trump declared publicly: “An entire civilization will die tonight, and will never return again. I do not want this to happen, but it will probably happen.”
However, instead of carrying out the fateful threat, Trump retreated. It was a rare window of opportunity. A combination of the entry of the Kurds and other minorities into a ground campaign, together with massive aerial strikes by the United States and Israel, could have stirred the Iranian people to pour into the streets in large numbers and bring about the overthrow of the regime.
In practice, the heavy pressure from within the United States and from European countries, stemming from the worsening economic crisis following the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, had its effect.
Trump’s fear of the approaching midterm elections for the House of Representatives, combined with the drop in his approval ratings to an unprecedented low of 41%, caused him to break just before the operation. That same evening, shortly before 8:00 p.m., he announced a two-week ceasefire in an attempt to find a political solution.
The meaning of this move is destructive: in making this decision, Trump granted de facto recognition to the legitimacy of the extremist regime in Iran.
Instead of acting to destroy it, he chose to preserve its existence. This is a disastrous decision for Israel and for the entire world. As long as the current regime rules in Iran, there is no chance of long-term understanding. Even if agreements are signed, Tehran will wait for the first opportunity, for example, at the end of Trump’s term, to blatantly violate them and continue the unchecked race to obtain nuclear weapons. Without the defeat of Iran’s extremist regime and the dismantling of the Revolutionary Guards, no strategic solution will be found that can ensure Israel’s long-term security and survival.