TUNIS, March 26. /TASS/. The potential trajectory of the Iran-US conflict could unfold in several ways, according to Egyptian expert Ahmed Mustafa, director of the Asian Research and Translation Center.
A prolonged standoff appears to be the most probable scenario, Mustafa told TASS. "The most likely course is a sustained air campaign, where extended airstrikes gradually wear down both sides, and the Strait of Hormuz periodically closes, causing persistent disruptions to the global energy market." He also warned that such a scenario carries inherent risks, including accidental strikes and attacks on regional infrastructure, which could escalate tensions further.
A diplomatic deadlock is also conceivable. Mustafa emphasized that "indirect negotiations may not lead to a comprehensive agreement or escalate into full-scale war." Under such circumstances, Iran might continue limited uranium enrichment under increased IAEA oversight, sanctions could be partially eased, and the Strait of Hormuz might remain open under international supervision.
Mustafa did not rule out a more dangerous development: "There remains the possibility of regional escalation culminating in a full-scale war, including a ground invasion, with Iran’s allies in neighboring countries potentially involved."
He also highlighted the influence of domestic politics. "Internal political dynamics could trigger a military coup or negotiations aimed at regime change," Mustafa noted. "However, the greater concern is not democratization but the potential fragmentation of the state, which could lead to dispersal of nuclear materials and increased instability."
Coercive Engagement
Regarding the nature of US-Iran relations, Mustafa described the current situation as a form of "coercive engagement." He explained, "This is neither outright war nor genuine diplomacy. Instead, it’s a strategic use of pressure to legitimize coercive tactics." He pointed out that negotiations serve as a fa·ade to justify exerting pressure, which aims to achieve objectives that are otherwise unattainable diplomatically. "The US relies on Iranian oil to stabilize global markets while simultaneously seeking to limit Iran’s oil revenue," he said.
Mustafa also observed that attacks on nuclear facilities, intended as deterrence, paradoxically encourage Iran to develop its nuclear program further as a form of strategic deterrence. Iran’s responses - strikes on strategic targets, closing the Strait of Hormuz, and persistent resistance - reflect a perception that external threats outweigh domestic issues, he concluded.
On February 28, the US and Israel launched a military operation against Iran. The country's largest cities, including Tehran, were hit. The White House justified the attack by citing missile and nuclear threats allegedly emanating from Tehran. The strikes on Iran killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several other key figures in the country's leadership. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (the elite unit of the Iranian Armed Forces) announced a large-scale retaliatory operation, attacking Israel. US targets in Bahrain, Jordan, Iraq, Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, Oman, and Saudi Arabia were also hit.