Iran perceives the conflict not as a regional dispute but as a direct threat to its existence. Its strategy is to make the war so costly for adversaries that it secures long-term guarantees against future attacks, framing its actions through a lens of survival.

Constant military pressure and assassinations remove any disincentive for Iran to pursue nuclear weapons. When a regime is already being attacked, acquiring a nuclear deterrent becomes its most logical and effective path to survival, mirroring North Korea's strategy.

Destroying Iran's conventional military without toppling the regime could create a cornered, vengeful state. Lacking other options and led by a leader whose father was just killed, it might turn to asymmetric warfare like terrorism to retaliate for its humiliation and losses.

Before the conflict, Iran maintained a "credible but not actual" nuclear program as a deterrent. By assassinating the supreme leader and launching an air war, the US has proven this strategy insufficient, forcing Iran to pursue an actual nuclear weapon for survival.

The targeted Iranian supreme leader had issued two religious edicts (fatwas) against developing nuclear weapons. His assassination removed this key restraint and installed his more aggressive son, who has not issued similar edicts, thereby inadvertently accelerating the nuclear threat.

While a ground invasion is unlikely, a potential US military strategy involves a direct assassination attempt on Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei. This high-risk decapitation strike aims to destabilize the regime's core, but the effect on the cohesion of its security forces is completely unpredictable.

Iran has anticipated leadership decapitation strikes for decades, building a resilient and distributed command and control infrastructure. This allows its forces, particularly the IRGC, to continue operating and launching attacks even without direct contact with headquarters.

The assassination of Iran's old, restrained leadership paved the way for a new generation of commanders. This new group believes the previous strategy of restraint led to war, and that only aggressive, disproportionate responses can serve as an effective deterrent against the U.S. and Israel.

Instead of only retaliating directly against a superior military power like the U.S., Iran escalates "horizontally." It uses drones and missiles to attack the economic interests (tourism, airports) of U.S. allies, pressuring them to expel American forces from their countries.