Iran’s swift retaliation following joint US-Israeli strikes that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has shifted global attention from the initial attack to a pressing strategic question: how far can Tehran project military power and what tools does it have to sustain a confrontation against two technologically superior adversaries?
Read also | Fears of 1970s-style oil embargo worry experts amid Iran conflict – what it means
As missiles and drones enter the opening phase of exchanges in the Middle East, regional governments, energy markets and defense planners begin to assess whether the crisis will remain a closed cycle of retaliation or evolve into a protracted conflict shaped by Iran’s asymmetric capabilities.
Conflict framed as existential
Iranian officials framed the confrontation not as a limited escalation, but as a struggle for the survival of the state. Unlike the brief 12-day war in June 2025, the killing of Khamenei appears to have changed Tehran’s strategic calculus.
In domestic messaging, there is a danger that reticence signals vulnerability. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said seeking revenge for the deaths of senior leaders was “the country’s duty and legitimate right”.
Read also | Israel Attacks Iran LIVE: IDF Continues Attacks on “Iranian Terror…” Targets
This framework helps explain the scale and speed of Iran’s response, which targeted Israel and US-linked military installations in the Persian Gulf region, including states hosting US forces.
Iran’s Missile Arsenal: The Core of Deterrence
At the center of Iran’s military doctrine lies its missile program — widely considered by defense analysts to be the most extensive and diverse in the Middle East. The missile force, partially offset by an aging air force, allows Tehran to strike across the region without relying on conventional air superiority.
Iran portrays these systems as defensive deterrents. Western governments say they contribute to instability and could one day support nuclear weapons delivery capabilities, which Tehran denies.
Read also | Did Iran fire a missile at a British air base in Cyprus? British Defense Secretary says…
The country’s longest-range ballistic missiles are estimated to travel 2,000 to 2,500 kilometers, putting Israel and numerous US-linked facilities within range. However, these systems cannot reach the continental United States despite claims to the contrary.
Short Range Missiles: Designed for instant retaliation
Short-range ballistic missiles with a range of roughly 150 to 800 kilometers make up what analysts often describe as Iran’s “first strike” capability.
Systems such as the Fateh family, including Zolfaghar and Qiam-1 missiles along with older Shahab variants, are designed for rapid regional strikes against nearby military targets. Their shorter trajectories shorten warning times and complicate interception efforts when fired in coordinated volleys.
Read also | Trump vows revenge after Iranian strikes kill 3 US service members – ‘unfortunately…’
Iran demonstrated this approach in January 2020 after the killing of Qasem Soleimani, who fired ballistic missiles at Iraq’s Ain al-Assad Air Base. The attack damaged infrastructure and caused traumatic brain injuries to more than 100 US personnel, illustrating Tehran’s ability to impose costs without directly matching the US Air Force.
Medium Range Missiles: Expanding the battlefield
If short-range systems provide immediate retaliation, medium-range ballistic missiles will turn conflicts into regional crises.
Missiles such as the Shahab-3, Emad, Ghadr-1, Khorramshahr and Sejjil variants extend Iran’s range to approximately 1,500 to 2,000 kilometers. Newer systems, including the Kheibar Shekan and Haj Qassem, further increase the flexibility of strikes.
The Sejjil’s solid-fuel design offers faster launch readiness compared to its liquid-fuel counterparts, enabling rapid deployment even under the threat of pre-emptive strikes.
Together, these weapons put Israel and US-linked facilities in Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates within range, expanding both military exposure and political risk across the Gulf.
Cruise missiles and drones: Saturation strategies
In addition to ballistic missiles, Iran relies heavily on cruise missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles designed to complicate air defense systems.
The cruise missiles – including the Soumar, Ya-Ali, Quds, Hoveyzeh, Paveh and Ra’ad variants – fly at low altitudes and can follow terrain contours, making detection difficult. Soumar is estimated to have a range of up to 2,500 kilometers.
Read also | Dollar rises, euro falls as Iran war raises energy prices
Drones add a different type of pressure. Although they are slower, they are cheap and can be run in large numbers. Analysts expect Iran to use waves of one-way attack drones along with missiles to overwhelm defenses and maintain long-term disruption of airports, ports and energy facilities.
Such saturation tactics allow Tehran to sustain psychological and operational pressure for hours, not minutes.
Underground “Missile Cities”: Built for survival
Iran’s ability to continue fighting depends not only on weapons but also on survivability.
Over the years, Tehran has built underground storage networks, hidden launchers and hardened tunnels – often referred to as “missile cities”. These pages are designed to retain hitability even after significant strikes.
For adversaries, this means that the rapid destruction of Iran’s missile capabilities is unlikely, raising the risk that further attacks could provoke larger exchanges rather than decisive results.
Strait of Hormuz: Economic leverage without a blockade
Iran’s strategic toolbox goes beyond ground warfare. The Strait of Hormuz – a vital maritime corridor for global oil and gas transport – provides Tehran with powerful economic leverage.
Iran can threaten shipping through anti-ship missiles, naval mines, drones and fast attack vessels. It has also promoted what it describes as “supersonic” systems, including the Fattah range, claiming exceptional speed and maneuverability, although independent verification remains limited.
Read also | Allies support the US, while Russia and China condemn the “blatant” killing of Khamenei
Even without a formal blockade, a disruption can move markets. Reports of radio warnings attributed to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and attacks on US- and UK-linked oil tankers have already affected vessel movements and insurance costs. Danish shipping giant Maersk announced the suspension of shipping through the strait, underscoring the economic ripple effects.
The US Military Presence: Strength and Vulnerability
Washington responded by deploying additional naval and air assets to the region, creating one of the largest concentrations of US military power near Iran in recent years.
While this boosts defensive and offensive capabilities, it also expands the number of potential targets. US forces rely on a distributed network of bases and logistics hubs across many countries, not all of which can be fully protected at all times.
Read also | Amidst flight disruptions, India’s CEO shares how he’s handling chaos in Kuwait
Military analysts note that even limited successful strikes could reshape political calculations in Washington and increase pressure on regional allies.
Tehran signals a prolonged campaign
Iranian leaders have long warned that attacks on Iranian soil would trigger a wider war rather than a limited confrontation. After Khamenei’s killing, this warning seems to have grown into a doctrine.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has vowed continued retaliation and signaled an ongoing campaign that includes firing rockets into Israel, strikes near US-linked facilities and threats against key trade routes.
The conflict also carries the risk of expansion through allied groups, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and Yemen’s Houthis, both of which condemned the killing of Khamenei and expressed support for Tehran.
