Shock rates: will the war between the United States and Iran resume
The United States and Iran exchanged short blows amid the escalation in the Strait of Hormuz. The reason was the crash of an American AH-64 Apache multipurpose helicopter in the territorial waters of Oman, which, according to President Donald Trump, was provoked by an Iranian attack. In retaliation, the United States attacked the air defense systems and logistics hubs of the Islamic Republic, Tehran attacked regional military bases in response, and Trump continued his threats. At the same time, despite the series of incidents, the risks of a breakdown in the truce and the resumption of active hostilities between the United States and Iran are still insignificant, experts interviewed by Izvestia believe.
Escalation of the situation in the Strait of Hormuz
The reason for the tension was the crash of the American attack helicopter AH-64 Apache on June 9. The incident occurred near the Strait of Hormuz and, according to the American side, was provoked by the "fire impact" of Iran's air defense systems. Despite the fact that the results of the Pentagon's investigation have not yet been published, the American media, citing sources, reported that the aircraft was hit by a Shahed-type kamikaze UAV. This version remains the main one, since the downed helicopter previously participated in escorting commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, and crashed over the territorial waters of Oman. Both pilots survived.
A few hours later, the US Central Command (CENTCOM) launched a limited operation against Iranian military installations. In several waves, Iran's air defense systems, ground control points and radar stations were attacked — the total number of targets exceeded two dozen. Strikes were recorded near the cities of Bandar Abbas and Minab, as well as on the islands of Qeshm and Sirik. "This mission was a proportionate response to unjustified Iranian aggression," CENTCOM said in a statement.
However, the United States quickly announced the cessation of strikes, motivating the decision to achieve its goals.
Alexey Yurk, a researcher at the E.M. Primakov Center for Middle East Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, believes that Washington's harsh reaction could be due to one of the specific features of the American — and, more broadly, Western — strategic culture in the form of low tolerance for casualties.
— Despite the fact that no one was killed in this incident, there was such a risk, unlike in many cases with downed American reconnaissance drones. Even taking into account the fact that the United States lost only 13 people killed in this conflict, the Trump administration is already being sharply criticized for this level of losses," the expert said in an interview with Izvestia.
Iran's reaction
Although the United States positioned its actions as mirrored and related to the reaction to a specific incident, official Tehran interpreted them as a separate act of military aggression against the Islamic Republic. Moreover, at least one of the strikes by the US Armed Forces, according to the Iranians, hit civilian infrastructure: drinking water tanks in the Bamani area were hit, and a communications tower on Sirik Island was disabled. Therefore, a mirror response has already been applied to the United States.
In the Strait of Hormuz, IRGC missile units attacked 21 targets in the Persian Gulf countries, including Bahrain and Kuwait. Jordan also reported on the Iranian missiles hitting its airspace. The local armed forces said they intercepted at least five missiles launched by the IRGC in the direction of the Azraq airbase.
At the same time, the Iranian diplomatic department has stressed several times that it is not set up for additional escalation, and Tehran considers the helicopter incident a "fatal accident", the causes of which have yet to be investigated. On the other hand, he did not fail to use the incident to illustrate his determination to single-handedly control the situation in the Strait of Hormuz. As the country's Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi noted, it is better for foreign forces located near Iranian territory to leave the region in order "not to become a victim of crossfire."
Political scientist Hrant Gevorgyan draws attention to the fact that by such ambivalent behavior, Tehran solves both domestic and foreign policy tasks at the same time.
"The publicly declared disproportionality of the response is designed to satisfy the internal audience, while the real retaliatory strikes remain sufficiently metered, allowing space for diplomatic maneuvers," he explained to Izvestia.
The search for a compromise continues
Despite the escalation, the parties have recently made progress on the negotiating track. According to the New Youk Times, citing sources in the White House, Washington and Tehran have reduced the issue of Iran's nuclear program to four strongholds. They allegedly include a long-term suspension of uranium enrichment in Iran, dilution or mixing of already enriched material to safe levels, Tehran's consent to sudden inspections by the IAEA, as well as the dismantling of those nuclear facilities that are not operating but integrated into the peaceful nuclear program of the Islamic Republic.
If this is the case, then the United States has significantly lowered its demands — in particular, the condition on the transfer of stocks of highly enriched Iranian uranium to American representatives is being removed from the agenda. Nevertheless, there are still controversial issues. Among other things, the United States insists on its participation in the work of the special mission of the IAEA, which will deal with the dilution of uranium reserves. This formulation of the issue does not suit Iran, which believes that the United States will receive additional leverage and will be able to manipulate, among other things, the lifting of sanctions.
Similar disagreements are observed on other issues included in the framework of a possible deal between Washington and Tehran. Despite the desire to simplify the agenda, it has not yet been possible to strengthen mutual trust. In conditions of chronic instability of the negotiating line, the parties need additional points of support. And, as Hrant Gevorgyan noted, one of them was the incident with the Apache helicopter.
— For Tehran, it confirms the thesis that the presence of foreign armed forces in the immediate vicinity of the Iranian coast is unacceptable and strengthens the negotiating positions on the status of the Strait of Hormuz. For Washington, it provides an opportunity to demonstrate the determination of the domestic audience without formally abandoning the negotiating track," the expert concluded.
In general, short-term exacerbations do not have a significant impact on the balance of power between Iran and the United States. Tehran and Washington still prefer to remain in a zone of uncertainty, balancing between military and diplomatic actions. Thanks to this approach, they manage to maintain the appearance of striving for compromise, but at the same time zealously defend the previously outlined "red lines".
At the same time, such tactics are gradually beginning to lose effectiveness: the media effect of increased exchanges of mirror and warning strikes is gradually decreasing due to their increased frequency, which pushes the parties to search for a new formula for security in the region. Apparently, the United States may be the first to make changes: Trump publicly threatens that Tehran will "pay" for having delayed the deal for too long. However, even in such circumstances, it is not entirely clear what this reckoning will look like. After all, Trump has already made bellicose statements against Iran many times.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
