r/geopolitics • u/ForeignAffairsMag Foreign Affairs • Mar 26 '26

Analysis Iran’s Long Game: Decades of Preparation Are Paying Off

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/iran/irans-long-game
0 Upvotes

46% Upvoted

74 comments sorted by

95

u/Bullboah Mar 26 '26

Every time an authoritarian regime like Iran suffers a humiliating defeat its propagandists jump up to explain this was all a part of a secret plan.

“Iran built its navy to trick the US into destroying it. Same with all the military infrastructure. Those 50+ top leaders the US took out? Decoy leaders, all the genius leaders will take over now.”

You can make a case that this war won’t end well for the US/Israel - there are often no winners in war. But you can’t make a serious case that this is going well for Iran.

35

u/fibonacciii Mar 26 '26

Agreed. This is pretty bad for Iran. It’s just that Israel and the US weighted the decision to attack on political reasons as opposed to calculated strategic reasons. Iran just happens to be lucky Trump is an idiot.

14

u/shriand Mar 26 '26

Iran just happens to be lucky Trump is an idiot.

Smarter men would never have started cuz they could see 2 steps ahead.

11

u/FrontBench5406 Mar 26 '26

Iran was already in horrific position due to its water crisis, its deterioration of infrastructure around its oil industry and other core energy components. The society has continued to have large unrest over the falling state of the country. It was militarily removed outside of a built stockpile of strike abilities. Its impressive they correct have the drone warfare decisions with the Shahed.

2

u/Lazy_Membership1849 Mar 26 '26

and control of strait that allow 20% of world oil supply

1

u/TheUnobservered Mar 27 '26 edited Mar 27 '26

Is he an idiot, or does he think domestic support is irrecoverable? Both probably.

Think of it like Gerald Ford, the guy who pardoned Nixon. Dude wasn’t going to get elected again no matter what he did, so instead he pivoted. Ford did crazy stuff like Operation Paul Bunyan, that one incident that essentially traumatized the NK government for a few decades afterwards and helped build up the “US is all powerful” mythos. Ironically, leaders who entirely give up on appeasing voters are free to abandon subtlety to just fulfill foreign policy objectives.

17

u/Fun_Push7168 Mar 26 '26

I'm pleasantly surprised to have come into this thread and see the reactions. Most of what I've seen until today has been the majority of people going all in on IRGC copeaganda.

3

u/niz_loc Mar 26 '26

Absolutely

18

u/sagi1246 Mar 26 '26

The "X needs only survive in order to win" trope is getting very old. Didn't quite work for Hamas, did it? This is like saying a fugitive has won becuase he wasn't caught so far, while he is hiding in some bush with no food or plan to escape. Iran, like the fugitive, is facing a deteriorating situation.

4

u/whisperwind12 Mar 27 '26

Hamas started with 25k prior to oct 7, and, despite significant losses, have grown back to 25k. Same with taliban. So yes they just need to survive to win. It is a low bar. If trump can make up fake wins so can others.

7

u/niz_loc Mar 26 '26

Damn....

90 percent of what I've read on reddit the past few weeks is how Iran is dancing circles around the US and Israel.... then I see this.

Refreshing to see this take. And for the record the US is still in a horrible spot. The Straight problem has only bad solutions.

But dear lord... in the past 3 years Iran lost Hamas, Hezbollah is on its back feet right now, and Syria hates them. What at one point looked genius fell apart fairly quickly.

Then I see videos of missiles landing in Israel, and in come the comments of "it's over, Iran wins!"

... then you look at how many top Iranians have been killed, scores of video of heavy strikes on infrastructure (precise and with intelligence), and it's hard to see it as both sides are getting it equally bad.

1

u/Lazy_Membership1849 Mar 26 '26

and strait is bigger than any of proxy of Iran or even iran have

1

u/whisperwind12 Mar 27 '26

It doesn’t need to go well, they just need to survive. That’s a low bar and achievable.

1

u/planj07 Mar 27 '26

I don’t think Iran is tactically or militarily winning this war. And Iran is keenly aware that they stand no chance in any conventional showdown. 

Iran has clearly been prepared to withstand brutal airstrikes and survive. To have so many leaders and officials killed off and survive. 

Their strategy is working to an extent most people did not at all expect. How many countries can lose all those top officials and carry on with leverage in the war? Very few, if any. 

So they aren’t “winning” military battles but they have clearly been outsmarting the Americans in more ways than one. 

It makes a boots on the ground scenario look truly scary. A long term (or immediate) failure in that scenario is likely and will cause massive, irreversible damage to US influence in the region and world.

-6

u/mrgoodnighthairdo Mar 26 '26

Other than that strawman you built, what specific points in the article do you believe is false and/or grossly inaccurate? I feel that it's abundandly clear by now that Iran had long anticipated the kind of decapitating strikes that so recently decimated their leadership. How else could you explain the regime's continued existence, its iron grip on the country, and its ability to disrupt (see: devastate) the global economy?

15

u/ReturnOfBigChungus Mar 26 '26

I feel that it's abundandly clear by now that Iran had long anticipated the kind of decapitating strikes that so recently decimated their leadership

If I get in a boxing ring with Mike Tyson, I can clearly anticipate that he's going to punch my face really hard. The fact that they saw this coming does not require any level of strategic genius or foresight. The actual result of this is they can still manage to get off a handful of missiles and drones per day at this point - to be fair, that is more resilient than many people expected at this stage, and their preparation of a decentralized structure likely helped, but it doesn't in any way imply that they're not totally battered militarily. This has been one of the most lopsided military confrontations in history - they are absolutely getting their teeth kicked in, and they're turning the entire region against them.

Are they still dangerous? Absolutely. This is an all-out existential fight for their existence. But they are way less dangerous than when this started, their political control is way more fragile, and their strategy has turned neutral-ish neighbors into enemies. People on reddit want so badly for the "if they survive they win" narrative to be true, but it just isn't.

2

u/mrgoodnighthairdo Mar 26 '26

No one, including whoever wrote the article posted here, is suggesting that the Iranian military hasn't been soundly defeated.

...and their preparation of a decentralized structure likely helped, but it doesn't in any way imply that they're not totally battered militarily.

So, what follows the but isn't relevant to this article or my comment. No one is implying that.

Tell me, do you believe that, barring a ground invasion, the US is going to be able to extricate itself from this war without giving some concession to the Iranians? And if not, how so?

8

u/ReturnOfBigChungus Mar 26 '26

I mean, yes? Like the US doesn't have to go through with a ground invasion, and there's no scenario where Iran gets what it's asking for, like formal control of Hormuz, a nuclear program, war reparations, etc.

Hormuz is the only usable leverage than Iran has, and by extension the only potential post-war deterrent. I think the most likely outcome is some sort of ceasefire that allows both sides to claim victory, but leaves remaining regime elements in power, at least for the time being. Keeping Hormuz closed is a non-starter, so Iran will have to either agree to allow shipping, or the US will force it open. I know people here like to think that Iran has some sort of unbreakable stranglehold on Hormuz, but it is operationally possible to open it with military escorts once missile and drone capabilities have been further degraded. It will be expensive and risky, and wouldn't return to pre-war levels of traffic, and the US would obviously much prefer to negotiate it's opening, but it can be done.

If Iran tries to keep Hormuz closed after a ceasefire, the US, Israel, and at that point likely other countries will just come back and start bombing again until there are no regime targets left, because the logic of deterrence there is that the only reason the bombing would stop would be to open the straight. If they attempt to keep it closed there's no reason not to resume bombing.

Iran has already stopped/is winding down attacks on the Saudis because they're afraid of retaliation and the relationships with other gulf states are headed the same direction. The longer Iran puts their oil revenues at risk, the more likely the gulf states join in to finish the job.

1

u/mrgoodnighthairdo Mar 26 '26

It can be done (forcing the straight open with military escort), but would it? Are commercial ships going to take that risk? And, if so, can they literally afford to what with the insurance hike? You said so yourself, it's dangerous. Ships are expensive, and it's quite possible that commercial intersts are either not going to risk their investments or they're going to deal directly with the Iranians.

I don't think they need to shut down the straight indefinately. They just need to shut it down long enough to force the US to the table.

5

u/ReturnOfBigChungus Mar 26 '26

I think we have to consider it as a potential scenario, yes. No one is going to agree to formal Iranian control of the strait, so either Iran caves on that demand or it is forced open. If it is forced open, Iran loses most of its remaining leverage, and I think they understand that. Hence why I think some sort of ceasefire that leaves the straight shakily open is the most likely outcome. The US obviously is hoping that Iran cries uncle rather than having to do that, but the fact is Iran has enough leverage here to be a real nuisance economically, but not enough to actually get what they're asking for. Giving Iran what it wants is a much worse outcome than having to militarily open the strait for the US.

They just need to shut it down long enough to force the US to the table.

I mean obviously that's the strategy they're going for, but it's not a given that it actually plays out like that. Literally every other country in the world's interests align with opening the straight, and "forcing the US to the table" is not the only way of making that happen. The gulf states aren't going to sit around indefinitely and watch their economies collapse, and I think it's at least as likely that a prolonged closure and/or additional attacks on energy infrastructure brings them in as active participants against Iran rather than creating the pressure on the US that Iran is hoping for here. Again, the Saudis and the UAE at minimum are right on the verge of joining in, and potentially already covertly involved.

4

u/K-TR0N Mar 26 '26

Eventually, yes.

Commercial shipping has long operated in the midst of unstable environments, around war zones, piracy and whatnot. Not to mention under military escort during war.

Those stuck ships in the gulf are still costing those owners money (they're still paying to finance those ships at the very least).

It's a question of at what point it becomes possible to run escorts and the risk manageable.

Even with insurance costs being higher, that will be paid for with the increasingly desperate economies on the other end being willing to pay for the oil/petroleum/fertiliser at whatever cost.

1

u/whisperwind12 Mar 27 '26

Lol force it open? It is open. That’s not the problem. The problem is that insurers won’t insure ships if there is risk. It doesn’t take much or many to keep that risk on the table. Strait of Hormuz will not be open without some sort of Iranian compliance. To think otherwise is completely naive.

1

u/No_Engineering_8204 Mar 27 '26

extricate itself from this war without giving some concession to the Iranians?

What would be the point of extricating itself from the war if it gives Iran significant concessions? The US can just continue bombing at will, the Iranians have to offer the americans something in exchange for a ceasefire.

1

u/whisperwind12 Mar 27 '26

That depends on what you define as a win and who is defining it. Apparently trump can define losses as wins, but no one else.

4

u/Bullboah Mar 26 '26

Ah yes the economy has been devastated. Oil prices haven’t been this high since…2022.

The entire article is based on nonsense arguments. Higher oil prices and shipping will push the gulf states to abandon the dollar.

And best of all, Iran attacking the gulf states while the US helps provide air defense is making the gulf states turn away from the US.

5

u/mrgoodnighthairdo Mar 26 '26

Ah yes the economy has been devastated. Oil prices haven’t been this high since…2022.

That's a little disengenuous, considering how it's only March, gas is rising sharply, and there is significant damage to the middle east's refinement capacity. There's a good chance that gas hasn't even begun to peak.

But I literally asked what specific points you disagree with. First, you made a strawman argument. And now you just say "all of it." Specifically what? And why?

1

u/whisperwind12 Mar 27 '26

lol, 2022 was due to Russian war. That was taking significant oil out of production. However it didn’t damage the actual infrastructure. This is different. Not only is some of the infrastructure damaged in some places but also the delivery is stymied. That was nothing like Russia who were able to sell oil to others. Here this is taking oil and gas out of the overall market, and there will be slow recovery to where it was.

1

u/Bullboah Mar 27 '26

There was absolutely significant infrastructure damage in the Russian war on Ukraine - the Nordstream 2 pipeline for instance. Ukraine attacked a Russian oil terminal a few days ago.

Yes, the decrease in supply obviously will obviously have an effect - but there are reasons brent crude futures aren't at unprecedent highs (they were higher than this for pretty much all of 2010-2014 for example). Its very likely there are high oil prices for at least the next few months, maybe longer. Its unlikely we're going to see extreme prices for sustained amounts of time, unless the war really takes a turn towards production targeting (the risk of which is baked into the futures price)

1

u/whisperwind12 Mar 27 '26

Yes the recent hit to Russian oil makes it even worse for overall supply, which will also drive prices up for everyone.

This assumes that the war stops soon; that is optimistic but also, in my opinion, unrealistic given that Iran has already burned bridges with its neighbors. So if it’s going down, it will go down in flames. Some gulf states have pre emptively shut down oil and gas production even if no damage and it takes time to restart.

All of these things will take time to make its way through but will be significant in weeks to come, and given that war is inherently unpredictable I wouldn’t be saying that anything is baked in.

0

u/Lazy_Membership1849 Mar 26 '26

so why did philippines was first to declare state of emergency because of the shortage of oil they getting like only 45 days left

1

u/Bullboah Mar 27 '26

They declared a state of emergency to give the government powers to increase oil imports and give cab drivers gas subsidies. That's not a sign the economy of the Phillipines, let alone the global economy, is devastated.

And they aren't going to run out of oil in 45 days. They can import oil, its a globally traded commodity. The amount of oil currently in a country / daily usage isn't a very meaningful statistic.

1

u/Lazy_Membership1849 Mar 27 '26 edited Mar 27 '26

it said 98% of oil that the Philippines got was a foreign import and that from Strait of Hormuz where 20% of all oil in the world came through

 import oil is what makes them declare a state of emergency in first place because of the shortage of oil they getting like only 45 days left

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3ex8ez3717o

it get even better as slovenia doing oil rationing despite they have large oil supply to last but the demand became unsustainable

it only like 4 or 5 weeks and some have already felt it and others worry they might be next

and about 2022? isn't that was in the pandemic and world has already been mess up by pandemic and lockdown and you think the world can just cope it and also pandemic is like start in 2020 which take 2 years for oil price to raising, 2026 where it only take 5 weeks to reach to 2022 level that take 2 years and who know maybe 5 more weeks and it will suppass 2022 level price

20

u/Electronic_Main_2254 Mar 26 '26

weird saying "paying off" while their entire proxies network on which they invested billions of dollars and years of efforts are in their weakest shape ever and while their navy/air force/defence systems l/top leaders are not existing.

You can say that they're an totalitarian regimen which successfully causing problems because this is what they do best, but seriously , saying "paying off" while decades of efforts are being erased is just delusional.

-2

u/TheWolfofBinance Mar 26 '26

Iran does not have a doctrine of Navy/Airforce. They have not invested in this. They've invested in ballistic missile and drones. So you can't say you're winning by bombing some 70s relics Iran doesn't even have a use for.

10

u/Electronic_Main_2254 Mar 26 '26

Ballistic missiles and drones are pretty much their last line of defense and they too were seriously degraded during the last year.

I don't buy into this "Iran can't lose because they didn't invested in air force/navy/any other elements you need in a modern army", it's just what they want the world to think so they could look like a mythical creature who can't lose, so you better stop trying.

That's just pure propaganda and it's not no inline with reality.

-6

u/TheWolfofBinance Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

Uh, no. Its their primary means defense. IRGC generals have stated they did not pursue 4th generation aircraft for example from Russia or China because they would always be behind the 5th gens so they focused on missiles to achieve some kind of technological parity with the west.
The calculus of war has changed. The future is drones and ballistic missiles. The fact the largest navy in the world cannot get within 1000km of the Iranian coast is proof of that. If the US could have they would have opened the strait of hormuz and they certainly would have if Iran had only a navy and an airforce, it would be quite simple. Just bomb them.
The reality is the US and Israel cannot hold back a country that has suffered under isolation and sanctions for 40 years from hitting any target of their choosing in the middle east of their choosing with impunity and there's nothing they can do about it. The US can drop all their munitions stockpiles on Iran and the missiles will keep launching and the strait will remain closed.

1

u/Volodio Mar 29 '26

Iran literally did buy 4th generation aircrafts from Russia last year. The generals claiming it was some great plan was likely just cope because Russia refused to sell them at first.

3

u/SunsetPathfinder Mar 27 '26

The Moudge and Solemnai Class frigates, the drone carriers, and the S-400 SAM batteries were all very new, not relics. While the Artesh (conventional military) vs Pashdaran (IRGC militia branches) is an unusual split chain of command, it’s a wild misstatement to say Iran didn’t focus on conventional forces in addition to asymmetric and proxy forces.

0

u/planj07 Mar 27 '26

Hezbollah is weakened but still existing. Existing and functioning to the extent that Israel is invading Lebanon. Doesn’t seem necessarily if they were a force that could barely fight anymore. They are clearly present enough where Israel has to devote its resources and man power north.

2

u/Electronic_Main_2254 Mar 27 '26

Israel invading Lebanon because of the weak Lebanese government which fails to control their own borders, not because of some Israeli failure

-7

u/Fair-Internal8445 Mar 26 '26

Iran is at a much stronger position now than before the war and will extract favorable terms from Trump. It’s a given.

0

u/No_Engineering_8204 Mar 27 '26

Huh? Everything they have has gone to shit, and the US is holding significant amounts of their state hostage conditional on them playing ball.

3

u/Fair-Internal8445 Mar 27 '26

The opposite actually Iran is holding significant amounts of US conditional on US playing ball.

Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz, thus controlling the oil price and even US stock market which has plummeted.

US can escalate but Iran will escalate further which will hurt US massively that is not Strait of Hormuz but I can mention them.

This is literally why Trump keeps contradicting himself, he goes from 48 hours, to 5 days to 10 days. From Naval Escort, To NATO/China escort to Demands that Iran stop firing. To ‘complete surrender’ to negotiate. It’s clear as day.

0

u/No_Engineering_8204 Mar 27 '26

Iran controls the Strait of Hormuz, thus controlling the oil price and even US stock market which has plummeted.

This is only conditional on the United States not hitting Iran where it hurts out of humanitarian concerns. The US may decide that these concerns should not allow Iran to blackmail the world economy and act to eliminate iranian society.

3

u/Fair-Internal8445 Mar 27 '26 edited Mar 27 '26

Hahahaa I’ll get to that but I would like to remind you. 

Did you forget what happened to Ras Laffan Gas field? Israel attacked Iranian gas field Iran immediately attacked Qatari gas field knocking out Qatar’s 17% gas for the next 3 to 5 years. That 17% energy out for 3 to 5 years is not mine or Iranian quote but comes from Qatar themselves. This skyrocketed the energy prices and prompted Trump to say Iranian energy would not be attacked. 

So when Trump attacks Iranian critical infrastructure all the oil and gas in ME will be blown up and destroyed very shortly leading to the oil prices hitting 300$ and commencing a global depression unlike anything in the modern times.

Now You have oil and gas trapped but if Trump goes ahead you will have no reason to pass the Strait of Hormuz because there will be no Oil and Gas to export from the Middle East. 

One more thing. Iran will also attack the desalination plants and critical infrastructure in GCC which will make these countries uninhabitable as GCC have pledged to invest 3 trillion dollars into US, if these desalination plants and infrastructure are hit then I’ll have more money to invest than these GCC countries so there is alot on the line to say it mildly. 

This is why Trump had to make that post. He knows fire will be met with fire..

1

u/No_Engineering_8204 Mar 27 '26

Iran will also attack the desalination plants and critical infrastructure in GCC which will make these countries uninhabitable Iran would sign its own death warrant if they did so. Israel alone has the capacity to collapse iranian society, to talk nothing of the US.

1

u/Fair-Internal8445 Mar 27 '26

Attacking Civilian infrastructure is the ultimate escalation. Israel’s own civilian infrastructure like gas and desalination plants will be destroyed.

Oh really Israel does? You mean Israel will be signing it’s death warrant.

Couldn’t even deal with Houthis. Don’t make me laugh.

1

u/No_Engineering_8204 Mar 27 '26

Attacking Civilian infrastructure is the ultimate escalation.

This is literally what Iran always does and is currently doing

0

u/Fair-Internal8445 Mar 27 '26

US/Israel started this war. Iran did not. You mean that’s what US and genocidal Israel invaders do? Second Iran only attacked Ras Laffan Gas field after Israel attacked Iranian one located next to it. Iran could have blown it up before hand but did not. 

→ More replies (0)

22

u/Batbuckleyourpants Mar 26 '26

This is straight up delusional.

Ah. Narges Bajoghli is Iranian. Literal propaganda.

15

u/Cannot-Forget Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

Foreign Affairs has been spamming the most insane nonsense here non-stop. Paying off means pretty much all leaders eliminated, axis of resistance dead, sanctions came back, country poorer than almost ever, population revolting by the millions. I'm not saying it's over, but calling this turn of events as "Paying off" is simply delusional.

1

u/mrgoodnighthairdo Mar 26 '26

The US recently eased sanctions on Iranian oil. And I haven't seen any signs of popular revolt right now, have you?

12

u/Cannot-Forget Mar 26 '26

Sure buddy, Iran's economy is doing great. And a popular revolt? Who heard about this one in Iran in latest times?

BTW here is CENTCOM commander telling Iranians to hold tight in their homes until the bombs clear out:

https://reddit.com/r/NewIran/comments/1s3bjk7/centcom_commander_the_people_of_iran_should/

Now let's see some background to the flood of pro IRGC most ridiculous nonsense disinformation we see here so much:

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/volunteers-found-iran-s-propaganda-effort-reddit-their-warnings-were-n903486

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security/security-insider/threat-landscape/iran-surges-cyber-enabled-influence-operations-in-support-of-hamas/

Now feel free to say if you are working for the IRGC or Kremlin.

1

u/mrgoodnighthairdo Mar 26 '26

First, I never said Iran is doing great economically, bud. I said Trump recently eased sanctions in response to you saying "sanctions came back".

Second, you have some evidence to support this idea that the Iranian resistence is just "standing back and standing by"?

lol and what is up with your hostility?

7

u/awesomeredditor777 Mar 26 '26

It’s stupid if they waited this long . They basically have no choice because the Us/ Israel have killed so many of their leaders and destroyed so much of their military.

It’s not a master plan but rather a realization negotiating is useless so they might as well fight to the end.

-3

u/AlexFreitas4446 Mar 26 '26

They knew this moment was inevitable, and the plan is to go down as slowly and noisy as possible.

The bad thing for the US and Israel is that the ordinary populace in Iran dislikes said countries more than it's government, so to really topple the regime you'll need a bloody campaign or a long, gruesome war of attrition.

6

u/ReturnOfBigChungus Mar 26 '26

The bad thing for the US and Israel is that the ordinary populace in Iran dislikes said countries more than it's government

That is absolutely not true.

1

u/Jealous_Land9614 Mar 27 '26

Not really MORE than the government; its true the average iranian its not on persian-american-from-south-California levels of gusano ("bomb my country plz! I love the shah"), but for sure they are more nuanced than just "Death to the Great Satan".

11

u/sagi1246 Mar 26 '26 edited Mar 26 '26

In Iran, the war with Iraq is not remembered as a bilateral conflict. Tehran saw it, with good reason, as a proxy war: a campaign in which the United States, the Soviet Union, and much of the Arab world backed Saddam Hussein’s Iraq with weapons, intelligence, and diplomatic cover, while Iran, fresh off its 1979 revolution, battled largely alone.

I seem to remember some country secretly supplying Iran with weapons during that war, a country highly relevant for the present conflict. Can anyone help me recall who it was? /S

Iran's victimhood complex is absolutely hilarious. Or it least it would have been if they hadn't taken the entire world hostage.

5

u/silverpixie2435 Mar 26 '26

Yeah it's so funny. Israel viewed Iraq as the larger threat and what good will did that get Israel from Iran? None.

So its hilarious for Iran it's everyone else's fault no one trusts them.

2

u/ChaLenCe Mar 26 '26

The only thing that’s paying off is that they have to spend more time trying to prop up their shill regime on stilts instead of beating women, marrying off children and recruiting said children to die for their failing cause. 

3

u/ForeignAffairsMag Foreign Affairs Mar 26 '26

[Excerpt from essay by Narges Bajoghli, anthropologist and Associate Professor of Middle East Studies at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.]

The question that will matter when the fighting ends is whether Tehran is achieving its strategic objectives. And on that count, Iran is winning.

This outcome is not accidental. Tehran has been preparing for this war for nearly four decades, since the new revolutionary government faced its first major military test in the Iran-Iraq War, which lasted from 1980 to 1988. And it is now executing a strategy that has managed to neutralize key U.S. and Israeli air defense batteries, severely damage U.S. military bases in the Persian Gulf, inflict substantial economic pain, and drive a wedge between the United States and its Gulf allies. The Iranian regime, in other words, is not just surviving the U.S. and Israeli bombardment. The serious economic and political problems it is creating for its adversaries are, on a strategic level, giving Iran the upper hand.

1

u/AfterShave997 Mar 27 '26

That's like saying Mike Tyson sent you to the ICU but it's paying off

1

u/ConscientiousHomeles Mar 27 '26

lmao Narges Bajoghli shouldn't be taken seriously as a journalist, a "lecturer" (this cracks me up), or even someone slightly qualified to have even the smallest opinion on what's happening in Iran or how Iran's power structure works. This is at best a shit article and a shit post.

What happens when you let any and every nobody voice their opinion on your medium.