Middle East
Iran expands deterrence as Gulf strikes expose US munitions limits, analysts say
In an in-depth strategic assessment broadcast on the Harici digital channel’s programme “Strategic Compass”, prominent political scientist and international relations scholar Prof. Dr. Hasan Ünal and veteran journalist, author, and Middle East and Iran specialist Alptekin Dursunoğlu, who serves as the Editor-in-Chief of Yakın Doğu Haber, delivered an exhaustive analysis of recent military confrontations between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran, the fundamental doctrinal transformation governing Iranian military retaliation, regional air defence vulnerabilities, and shifting geopolitical balances spanning the Persian Gulf, Lebanon, and Syria.
Opening the discussion, Prof. Dr. Hasan Ünal highlighted the recurring nature of US declarations of victory alongside paradoxical public statements by US President Donald Trump regarding Iranian obstinacy. Ünal outlined the immediate military flashpoint, noting that US forces opened fire on Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) units stationed near Larak Island in the Strait of Hormuz under the premise that Iranian forces were deploying naval mines. Ünal observed that Iranian authorities have not denied mine-laying capabilities, as their primary objective remains total operational control over the Strait of Hormuz—reinforced by recent bilateral maritime arrangements with the Sultanate of Oman.
Ünal emphasised that, as previously analysed alongside retired Admiral Deniz Kutluk, Tehran’s strategic planning has undergone an irreversible structural change. Iran no longer passively absorbs incoming strikes, nor does it limit itself to symmetrical responses; instead, it delivers immediate, disproportionately severe counterstrikes while seeking to integrate the Gaza Strip and Yemen’s Ansar Allah (the Houthis) into an indivisible regional operational theatre.
“Iran has shifted its doctrine from equal response to escalation”
Detailing the tactical reality of the overnight strikes, Dursunoğlu confirmed that Tehran bypassed standard reciprocal proportionality to execute an escalated retaliatory strike. Following the US attack on Larak Island, Iranian forces launched salvos of precision missiles against two major military facilities in Jordan: the Muwaffaq al-Salti Air Base and the King Hussein Air Base, both identified by Tehran as staging grounds for the US operation.
Simultaneously, Iranian conventional military units and the IRGC coordinated retaliatory drone strikes against US installations in the United Arab Emirates, specifically targeting the al-Minhad Air Base, while abstaining from targeting Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, or Bahrain.
Dursunoğlu explained that Washington and aligned media outlets, particularly Axios, had spent preceding weeks manufacturing a narrative that the Strait of Hormuz remained fully open under US dominion, with Trump going so far as to rhetorically claim the waterway as US territory following purported strikes against Iranian coastal surveillance radars at Sirik and Larak.
“Western media outlets launched a persistent information campaign claiming that commercial transit had reached 17 to 18 million barrels of crude oil per day through the southern corridor along the Omani coastline,” Dursunoğlu stated. “They claimed that commercial vessels were simply switching off their transponders, navigating under US naval escorts, and that Iran had been completely blinded after its coastal radars were hit.”
“If the strait is yours, why sneak ships at night?”
Challenging Washington’s official narrative, Dursunoğlu cited on-the-ground reporting from Iranian correspondents in the coastal zone, explaining that Iranian maritime surveillance does not depend on single, vulnerable radar stations.
“Iranian coastal monitoring relies on an integrated five-layer surveillance network,” Dursunoğlu said. “Even if an adversary strikes terrestrial radar installations, you cannot obscure the physical horizon. From Iranian territory on Larak Island, the Omani coast is plainly visible to the naked eye. Commercial oil tankers and cargo vessels are not high-speed patrol craft or evasive warships; they move slowly, and IRGC fast-attack craft continuously patrol the maritime corridors.”
Dursunoğlu pointed to Iranian television broadcasts demonstrating IRGC naval personnel issuing radio warnings to commercial vessels attempting unauthorised transit, resulting in the ships aborting their routes and reversing course.
“Washington’s claims contradict basic logic,” Dursunoğlu said. “On one hand, you claim the Strait of Hormuz is under complete US control, that Iran’s navy is destroyed, and that Iranian surveillance is blinded. On the other hand, you report that commercial vessels are conducting ship-to-ship transfers, turning off radars, and sneaking through Omani territorial waters at night under reduced capacity of 8 to 10 million barrels per day. If you truly control the waterway, why are commercial ships forced to sneak through in total secrecy? This entire narrative is designed solely to manipulate international energy markets and temporarily depress Brent crude prices.”
Addressing CENTCOM claims that US forces struck two Fajr-5 rocket launchers allegedly modified to deploy naval mines over 150-kilometre ranges, Dursunoğlu noted that Tehran acknowledged the engagement with factual transparency, reporting three military personnel killed and seven wounded. Conversely, when the IRGC reported that an oil tanker struck two naval mines and halted transit, CENTCOM and Western maritime reporting entities, including the UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), issued blanket denials to project artificial commercial safety.
“The fundamental question remains: if the Strait of Hormuz was entirely secure, why did US forces strike Larak Island in the first place?” Dursunoğlu asked. “And when the US strikes two launchers, Iran does not absorb the blow; it immediately strikes two strategic air bases in Jordan and deploys dozens of combat drones against US facilities in the United Arab Emirates.”
“The US military stock depletion prevents a wider war”
The precision strikes in Jordan once again exposed severe limitations in Western air defence architecture. Ünal observed that US-manufactured Patriot air defence batteries stationed in Jordan failed entirely to intercept incoming Iranian missiles, echoing previous operational shortcomings.
“Patriot batteries proved completely useless once again,” Ünal said. “This performance is particularly instructive at a time when certain domestic commentators in Türkiye absurdly discuss placing our S-400 systems—the undisputed premier air defence platform in the world—up for political bargaining. Iran’s latest missile iterations demonstrate superior guidance, penetration, and propulsion technologies, which the Pentagon is forced to scrutinise after every engagement. Iran has comprehensively prepared for a protracted war of attrition.”
Dursunoğlu concurred, noting that Tehran deliberately saturates regional air defence batteries by forcing the deployment of multiple Patriot interceptors against individual ballistic threats. Satellite imagery subsequently confirmed direct impacts inside the targeted Jordanian facilities, disproving claims that all incoming projectiles were neutralized.
The strategic impasse facing Washington is further compounded by acute industrial and logistical exhaustion. Ünal highlighted recent analysis published in The Wall Street Journal indicating that US military munitions stockpiles have fallen below critical thresholds, forcing the Pentagon to redeploy naval strike groups from the Far East to compensate for the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group being rendered functionally combat-ineffective.
Dursunoğlu corroborated this assessment by citing statements from retired US military officials published by Military Times: “American military figures openly acknowledge that the structural damage sustained by US naval assets and support facilities in Bahrain is equivalent to losing an aircraft carrier—destroying what they long considered an unsinkable operational platform.”
Regarding regional escalation, Dursunoğlu stated: “The US administration cannot escalate this engagement into a broader conventional war. Washington lacks the ammunition, the logistical sustainment, and the operational resilience. Following strikes on Muwaffaq al-Salti, King Hussein Air Base, and al-Minhad, the US has absorbed the response and halted operations.”
Furthermore, Dursunoğlu noted that US forces have now lost approximately 25% of their total operational inventory of MQ-9 Reaper unmanned aerial vehicles along the Iranian front, representing an immense operational and financial loss of high-tier combat assets.
“Lebanon framework agreement bypassed the cabinet”
Turning to the Levant, the discussion examined the structural breakdown of Lebanese sovereignty following the November 2024 developments and the fall of Damascus. Ünal and Dursunoğlu analysed the controversial security framework signed between Beirut and Tel Aviv.
Dursunoğlu clarified that the diplomatic arrangement cannot be considered a legitimate act of state: “The so-called framework agreement was never submitted to the Lebanese Parliament, nor was it approved by the Council of Ministers. It could never pass the cabinet because ministers representing the Amal Movement and Hezbollah would exercise an immediate constitutional veto. The agreement was negotiated entirely through an ad-hoc commission established unilaterally by President Joseph Aoun and Prime Minister Nawaf Salam.”
Dursunoğlu outlined the military timeline: following the martyrdom of Hezbollah Secretary-General Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah on 27 September 2024 and the subsequent assassination of Hashem Safieddine, Israeli forces initiated a massive ground offensive on 1 October. Despite having lost its senior leadership tier, Hezbollah’s operational units held the border for 61 days until 27 November, restricting Israeli incursions to minor border fringes.
“The military equation in Lebanon was disrupted not by Israeli tactical success on the southern border, but by the collapse of Syria on 27 November,” Dursunoğlu explained. “With the fall of the Syrian state, Israeli forces occupied strategic territories in Syria equivalent in size to Gaza, seized Mount Hermon (Jabal al-Sheikh), outflanked the Bekaa Valley, and created entirely new assault corridors into Lebanon.”
Under the current framework, Dursunoğlu warned, the Lebanese government is enforcing concessions that Israel failed to achieve militarily: “The text does not demand that Israeli forces withdraw from occupied Lebanese territory; it employs the euphemism of Israeli ‘repositioning’ while demanding the unilateral disarmament of Hezbollah south of the Litani River. Meanwhile, Israeli forces systematically demolish southern border towns with explosive charges—entire communities like Naqoura have been wiped off the map under the pretext of destroying ‘Hezbollah infrastructure’, which in reality means bombing hospitals, civilian homes, and public schools.”
Dursunoğlu noted that while Israel continues to target the south and contentious zones such as the Ali Taher hills, it refrains from striking Beirut’s southern suburbs (Dahiyeh) due to direct Iranian deterrence and Washington’s intervention to avoid collapsing the fragile memorandum of understanding.
“Jolani received legitimacy in exchange for servitude”
Evaluating the ongoing negotiations and leaked diplomatic documents between Tel Aviv and the newly installed administration in Damascus headed by Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, Ünal detailed Israeli demands for a 30,000-man lightly armed Syrian internal policing force, the permanent denial of Syrian airspace to sovereign air defences, the total disarmament and extradition of Palestinian factions, the resettlement and compensation of Jewish populations alongside high-level parliamentary representation, and the total prohibition of any Turkish military presence on Syrian soil.
Dursunoğlu affirmed that the operational conduct of the new Damascus authorities fully aligns with Israeli strategic prerequisites: “The transaction is straightforward: political power in exchange for geopolitical servitude. An al-Qaeda figure who once had a $10 million US bounty on his head is suddenly received by Western capitals, delisted from international terrorism registries by Marco Rubio, and congratulated by Donald Trump. This legitimacy was granted because the new administration systematically abandoned the Golan front and permitted Israeli forces to operate unhindered across Quneitra, Daraa, and Beit Jinn—just 35 kilometres from central Damascus.”
Dursunoğlu recalled that as early as 2011, figures associated with the Syrian National Council in Istanbul, such as Burhan Ghalioun, openly pledged to Western media that any successor administration would immediately sever ties with Iran, Hezbollah, and Palestinian resistance groups.
“Syria was never targeted over democratic governance,” Dursunoğlu emphasised. “It was targeted because it stood as the sole Arab state uncompromisingly rejecting the Camp David architecture and serving as an insurmountable geopolitical barrier against Israeli expansionism.”
“Syria was targeted as the barrier against Israel”
Ünal strongly criticised the historical and ongoing failures of Ankara’s Middle East policy, noting the grave strategic consequences of dismantling the Syrian state: “For years we warned that attempting to overthrow the sovereign Syrian government while engaging in empty rhetorical disputes with Israel represented an unsustainable foreign policy contradiction. Damascus served as a vital buffer state capable of standing on its own feet, defending itself against Israeli aggression with Russian and Iranian backing. By facilitating its destruction, Ankara now finds itself directly bordering Israeli military influence.”
Ünal dismissed claims that integrating the YPG into the Damascus administration represented a diplomatic victory for Türkiye, warning instead that it institutionalised the fragmentation of Syria. He further condemned the lack of strategic urgency demonstrated by Turkish diplomatic representatives in Damascus, who focus on cultural and religious antiquities while Israeli forces advance within artillery range of the Syrian capital.
Addressing the Israeli strike on the Abu al-Zuhur Air Base, Ünal and Dursunoğlu pointed out that Tel Aviv explicitly justified the attack by asserting it would never permit Türkiye to establish radar infrastructure or forward air defence systems inside Syria.
Concluding the broadcast, both analysts concurred that while the regional conflict is unlikely to escalate into a general, open-ended war due to severe US military supply limitations and Iranian retaliatory posture, a comprehensive peace remains distant. Any future regional settlement involving Gulf mediation or UAE proposals—such as initiatives referenced by Anwar Gargash—will ultimately require addressing Tehran’s financial claims, including the restitution of more than $300 billion in damages and seized sovereign assets.
Middle East
Israel military weighs legal steps against Gaza documentary makers
Israel’s Chief of General Staff, Eyal Zamir, has instructed officials to examine criminal and legal steps against the production team of the documentary “NAZA”, which focuses on testimonies from soldiers and intelligence personnel who served in Gaza operations.
While Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu targeted the production, describing it as “unacceptable”, more than 200 Israeli filmmakers published a joint statement backing the directors.
Maintaining that the documentary slandered the military, Chief of General Staff Zamir asserted that the work had no intention of uncovering the truth.
“In light of the available data, this production is not a work that constructively criticises the military,” Zamir said. “On the contrary, it relies on blood libels, a deliberate distortion of the reality on the ground, and baseless accusations directed at our soldiers and commanders.”
Zamir further claimed that the military was presented as an entity acting unlawfully and that the arguments of anti-Israel circles were adapted for the film.
The Israeli military is establishing a new multidisciplinary, inter-agency working group involving domestic and international experts to counter such allegations.
Meanwhile, the military’s most senior legal official, Itai Ofir, is reviewing the legal procedures that could be initiated against the documentary’s producers.
The military leadership contends that the testimonies lack credibility because the identities, ranks, and operational details of the personnel interviewed in the film were concealed.
Rejecting the assertion that targets were selected by artificial intelligence, military officials stated that all strikes and target approvals were decided by human hands within the framework of military directives.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reacted to the production in a video message shared on Telegram.
“This situation is appalling,” Netanyahu said, voicing his reaction. “While resisting antisemitic incitement conducted globally, it is unacceptable for a similar approach to arise from within ourselves. Two Israeli directors presenting the Israeli military as war criminals are being applauded at the Venice Film Festival.”
The 80-minute production was awarded the Special Jury Prize at the 83rd Venice International Film Festival and received a 25-minute standing ovation in the auditorium at the end of the screening.
In reactions emerging from the cabinet, Minister of Culture and Sports Miki Zohar accused directors Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor of “high treason”.
“The self-hatred displayed by these producers, who risk harming their own country to win the praise of antisemitic circles worldwide, is beyond comprehension,” Zohar said. Announcing that he would launch an initiative to revoke the directors’ citizenship, Zohar stated that direct accusations of treason could be brought against the individuals.
Far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir also addressed the directors, stating: “You are a source of shame for the entire people of Israel. Get out of here.” Under current Israeli legislation, the culture minister does not have the authority to unilaterally revoke citizenship; decisions in this direction can be made only as a result of legal processes involving the Ministry of Interior and judicial bodies.
Following the mounting backlash, more than 200 Israeli filmmakers, including Ari Folman, Shlomi Elkabetz, Ran Tal, and Michal Aviad, signed a joint declaration of solidarity. The text emphasised that “the primary duty of art and the profession of journalism is to hold up a mirror to the society from which it arises.”
Produced in partnership with The Guardian and JW Films, “NAZA” conveys testimonies from 24 military and intelligence personnel whose identities were kept concealed and who took part in surveillance, targeting, and air strike decisions in Gaza.
Deriving its name from a Hebrew military acronym that designates the number of civilians expected to lose their lives during an operation and corresponds to the concept of “collateral damage”, the film documents that targets were determined using artificial intelligence and mass surveillance networks.
Describing high-tech weaponry and AI-assisted targeting mechanisms, one interviewed soldier made the comparison: “Because everything runs on remote control, the process resembles a video game.”
Another soldier described the deaths on the ground as “unbelievably fun”.
Director Yuval Abraham said: “The intelligence personnel we interviewed stated that the mass deaths were not an accident, but on the contrary rested upon a designed and systematic choice.”
Abraham and Szor stated that the production did not scrutinise individual soldier violations, but directly examined the institutional chain of command and operational doctrines.
The two directors had previously made the Oscar-winning documentary “No Other Land”, which addressed the displacement of Palestinians and settler violence in the occupied West Bank, alongside Palestinian filmmakers Basel Adra and Hamdan Ballal.
While the Ministry of Health in Gaza announced that the number of Palestinians who have lost their lives in the attacks exceeded 73,700, the actual death toll is projected to be far above this figure due to destroyed healthcare infrastructure and casualties lost beneath the rubble.
Middle East
Saudi Arabia asks UK for military aid to counter Houthis in Yemen
British Prime Minister Andy Burnham is considering responding to requests for military assistance directed at Yemen from the Saudi Arabian government.
According to sources speaking to Bloomberg, the prime minister has received various requests for diplomatic and military support from Saudi Arabia.
The sources stated that Saudi Arabia’s requests include providing operational support to its military to repel the advance of Ansarullah (the Houthis) along Yemen’s Red Sea coast towards the strategically vital Bab el-Mandeb Strait, as well as assistance in defending against attacks on oil infrastructure.
Under pressure to take action because of the economic difficulties generated by the war with Iran, Burnham is also concerned about creating the impression that he supports Donald Trump’s war against Iran, given that the UK public overwhelmingly opposes the war.
Reports had emerged that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman asked Donald Trump to conduct air strikes against the Yemeni resistance.
At present, the UK has approved the deployment of only British military advisers to Saudi Arabia.
This comes despite Saudi Arabia’s request for operational support to halt operations carried out by Yemeni forces along the coastline.
Former UK prime ministers Rishi Sunak and Keir Starmer had provided more comprehensive support to Saudi Arabia against the Yemeni resistance.
The prime minister was also warned by UK officials that the Bab el-Mandeb Strait is of vital importance to global maritime transport and the economy, and that the capture of this strait by the Houthis must be prevented.
Earlier on Monday, Bloomberg reported that Saudi Arabia was seeking to increase the volume of oil shipments transiting the Strait of Hormuz after shutting down its East-West crude pipeline.
Middle East
Saudi exportable crude stocks risk depletion within a week
Saudi Arabia risks exhausting its exportable crude stockpiles if the East-West pipeline to the Red Sea fails to resume operations, according to reports.
Citing companies purchasing Saudi crude as well as market traders, the Reuters news agency reported that such an outcome could trigger a severe contraction in global oil supply.
Oil flows through the pipeline were halted following drone strikes. The government in Riyadh has not yet issued an official statement regarding the extent of the damage or the expected duration of repair works.
Sources familiar with the matter have offered differing estimates regarding the repair timetable.
One source speaking to Reuters noted that works could take five to six weeks, while another source stated that the damage could be repaired more quickly and that partial oil flows could be restored before repairs are entirely completed.
Stocks at Yanbu port reach critical threshold
Traversing the Arabian Peninsula to the Red Sea port of Yanbu, the pipeline carries approximately 4 million barrels of oil per day. This volume represents roughly 4% of global oil supply.
The line previously provided Saudi Arabia with an alternative export route, bypassing the Strait of Hormuz where maritime traffic has faced disruptions due to regional conflict in the Middle East.
Three sources closely tracking shipment schedules indicated that, following the stoppage, oil reserves at Yanbu port would suffice to sustain exports for only five to seven days.
A fourth source stated that additional reserves held in Egypt at the Red Sea port of Ain Sokhna and the Mediterranean terminal of Sidi Kerir afford buyers shipments for several more days.
Storage capacities stand at approximately 35 million barrels at Yanbu, 18 million barrels at Ain Sokhna, and 20 million barrels at Sidi Kerir.
However, sources stressed that these facilities are not currently filled to maximum capacity and warned that these inventories will be entirely depleted if the pipeline is not brought back online.
Output at lowest level in 30 years
According to International Energy Agency data, disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz and Red Sea transit corridors pushed Saudi oil supply in August to its lowest level in 30 years.
Data submitted by the Riyadh government to OPEC show that the kingdom’s crude production fell from 10.9 million barrels per day in February to 6.2 million barrels per day in August.
In July, the Houthis in Yemen announced the launch of a naval blockade against Saudi Arabia. On 8 September, the Saudi Ministry of Energy announced that operations had been suspended at several energy facilities in the southern part of the country.
On the same day, the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued an official statement condemning Houthi strikes targeting facilities in the cities of Abha, Khamis Mushait, Jizan, and Najran.
Riyadh authorities reported that 73 civilians, including women and children, were injured in the attacks. US President Donald Trump stated that Iran might be behind this attack on Saudi Arabia.
In oil markets, Brent crude futures recorded their sharpest single-day gain since late July on Thursday, 10 September.
The price of November Brent crude contracts rose by 6.3% to reach $107.6 per barrel. Prices retreated below the $105 mark the following day.
-
America1 week agoMilanovic declares global neoliberalism dead, warns of plutocracy
-
America2 weeks agoOver half of Latino voters back Democrats in key US House races
-
Asia2 weeks agoIran and China run secret barter network to bypass oil sanctions
-
America2 weeks agoTrump energy shares rose by up to $4.4m during Iran war, CNBC reports
-
America1 week agoFive minutes to doomsday – 4: American capitalism at the frontiers
-
Russia2 weeks agoMearsheimer says Trump seeks Ukraine peace but lacks diplomacy skills
-
Asia1 week agoDeepSeek engineer warns AI will lead to communism or Cyberpunk
-
America1 week agoBig Tech profits from AI extinction hype, Ken Klippenstein says
