Iranian leadership believes it holds the strategic upper hand in its ongoing war against the U.S. and Israel [1].
This assessment comes as the conflict threatens to destabilize the Strait of Hormuz and fracture the strategic alliance between the U.S. and its European partners [2, 3]. The perception of Iranian resilience suggests that Tehran may be less inclined to make concessions during peace negotiations.
According to a former MI6 chief, "Iran has the 'upper hand' in the war against the US and Israel" [1]. This advantage is rooted in Tehran's ability to maintain regional proxy networks, and endure heavy economic sanctions while projecting military resilience [1, 4].
The current escalation began when U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iranian territory started on Feb. 28, 2026 [2]. Since then, the conflict has centered on critical maritime corridors and Iranian soil [3].
However, other analysts suggest the situation remains volatile. A CNN correspondent said on April 20, 2026, that a series of strikes between the U.S. and Iran that week raised fresh concerns that a ceasefire could collapse [4]. This volatility indicates a precarious balance where military strikes continue to test the viability of peace pushes [4].
Iran's strategy relies on a combination of economic endurance and the ability to project power through regional allies. By maintaining these networks, Tehran said it possesses the necessary leverage to dictate terms in any eventual settlement [1, 4].
“"Iran has the 'upper hand' in the war against the US and Israel."”
The discrepancy between Iran's self-perception of strength and the precarious nature of ceasefires suggests a strategic stalemate. While Tehran leverages its regional proxies and sanction-resistance to claim victory, the continued cycle of strikes indicates that neither side has achieved a decisive military conclusion, increasing the risk of accidental escalation in the Strait of Hormuz.
