New Delhi: Defence analyst and FORCE magazine founder editor Pravin Sawhney has argued that Iran will not lose the ongoing conflict in West Asia despite the scale of military pressure from the United States and Israel. Speaking in a detailed assessment on the evolving conflict, Sawhney said the outcome of the war will not depend only on battlefield events. He stressed that the strategic structure of the conflict favours Iran in several ways.
Sawhney began by noting that the war had entered its fourth day with no clear timeline for its conclusion. While many observers attempt to predict the duration of the conflict, he said the central issue lies elsewhere. According to him, Iran does not need decisive victory to avoid defeat. If Iran retains sovereignty and territorial integrity, it achieves its baseline objective.
He described Iran as a historic nation with a civilizational depth of around five thousand years. In his view, Iran differs from political constructs formed in the modern Middle East. This historical continuity, he argued, shapes the country’s strategic outlook and national resilience.
Sawhney also rejected the assumption that Israel holds overwhelming military advantage. He said Israel’s military strength often appears overstated in public debate. He referred to last year’s twelve day conflict with Iran, during which the United States had to intervene to halt the fighting.
Another key point in Sawhney’s analysis involves structural changes within Iran’s military command. After lessons drawn from previous conflict, Iran reorganised its command system. Instead of relying on centralised leadership, it introduced decentralised command and control. Sawhney explained that such a system suits a war of survival.
In wars of survival, he said, unity of effort matters more than unity of command. Field commanders coordinate operations without dependence on a single central authority. This approach ensures operational continuity even if senior leadership faces targeting during war.
Sawhney also highlighted the political dimension of Iran’s war strategy. Iranian leadership shifted emphasis toward nationalism rather than religious identity as the main unifying force. However, recent events have generated wider Muslim solidarity across the region. According to Sawhney, the killing of Iran’s supreme leader strengthened emotional unity among Shia and Sunni communities across several countries.
He cited reactions in Bahrain as an example of regional public sentiment. Bahrain hosts the headquarters of the United States Fifth Fleet. Yet public demonstrations reportedly celebrated Iranian strikes on American positions. Sawhney said such reactions illustrate a widening gap between public opinion and the policies of ruling monarchies in parts of the Gulf.
The conflict has also affected strategic waterways. Sawhney stated that Iranian influence currently extends over the Strait of Hormuz and the Red Sea. Reports indicate that shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has dropped sharply, with only Chinese and Russian tankers continuing to pass through the area. Rising oil prices have followed these disruptions.
In the Red Sea region, allied forces have pledged to restrict maritime movement through the Bab al Mandeb strait. Sawhney described the western Indian Ocean region as an emerging conflict zone where multiple naval powers operate simultaneously.
He also noted military developments involving major global powers. China and Russia conducted joint naval exercises with Iran in the Sea of Oman. According to Sawhney, cooperation between these countries strengthens Iran’s strategic position.
China’s technological role also features prominently in his assessment. Sawhney said Iran has shifted away from reliance on American satellite navigation systems and adopted China’s BeiDou satellite network. This system offers precise targeting capabilities for drones and missiles. He argued that such technology provides Iran with advanced electronic warfare capacity.
Iran’s arsenal of drones and missiles also strengthens its long term endurance in the conflict. Sawhney believes Iran possesses enough production capacity to sustain operations for months if required. He added that North Korea has publicly indicated readiness to provide ballistic missiles if Iran requests them.
On the opposing side, Sawhney questioned the strategic clarity of American decision making. He described the conflict as a war of choice for the United States rather than a war of survival. In such situations, he said, military planners must clearly define objectives and campaign strategy. According to him, the current campaign shows signs of strategic uncertainty.
He also pointed to vulnerabilities facing the United States and Israel. Israel depends heavily on American support for sustained conflict. Meanwhile American military bases across the region face increasing missile and drone threats.
Sawhney concluded that the war should not have begun in the first place. Yet based on current dynamics, he maintained that Iran possesses the strategic depth, alliances, and military endurance required to avoid defeat.
