In Greek mythology, the Hydra was a monstrous serpent with many heads. Cut off one, and two more would instantly sprout in its place. That ancient symbol now fits Iran’s fightback with eerie precision—a beast that grows stronger and more dangerous the harder it is struck.
Today, Operations Epic Fury and Roaring Lion complete their first full week. Since February 28, 2026, the United States and Israel have unleashed repeated, precision strikes on Iran’s top leadership, command centres, missile silos, air-defence networks and IRGC naval assets. On the surface, the regime appears to be cracking like an anvil under a sledgehammer. Beneath that surface, however, it is hardening—spawning fresh threats that are rapidly spreading chaos across the Middle East.
Different goals, same high stakes
Washington and Jerusalem share the same ultimate aim—neutralising the Iranian threat—but their priorities differ.
Under President Donald Trump, the United States seeks regime change. The goal is total: dismantle Iran’s ballistic-missile arsenal, sink its navy, block any path to nuclear weapons, and shatter the proxy network that has strangled the region for decades. Trump frames this as the final chapter of a 47-year conflict. He intends to install a new, cooperative government in Tehran—one that guarantees safe Gulf oil flows and delivers him a historic political victory—all without committing American ground troops. This is similar to Japan’s unconditional surrender in August 1945.
Israel’s objective is more immediate and existential. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu demands the complete elimination of the direct and indirect threat from Tehran—whether Iranian missiles or Hezbollah and Houthi rockets. He hopes that sustained pressure will finally trigger an internal uprising by Iran’s exhausted population, a hope already echoed by Iranian exile groups protesting in Los Angeles and Washington.
Field victories mask political risks
The US/Israeli air campaign is built on “effects-based operations”—prioritising strategic impact over simple body counts. The results are impressive. US and Israeli forces now enjoy total air supremacy. B-52s and B-1 bombers operate unchallenged after all S-300 batteries and early-warning radars were systematically destroyed. More than 300 Iranian ballistic launchers have been wiped out, cutting attack volume by 90 per cent. The IRGC navy has been crippled—dozens of fast-attack boats and at least one warship sunk by torpedoes and drones. Overnight raids have hammered command hubs in Tehran and Isfahan and multiple IRGC bases. CENTCOM commanders have described the operation as “ahead of schedule.”
Yet these tactical successes conceal serious political vulnerabilities. The assassination of Supreme Leader Khamenei produced a temporary council that continues to issue defiant orders. No popular uprising has materialised inside Iran; instead, external attacks have triggered a surge in national pride. Hezbollah continues to probe Israel’s northern border. Nuclear sites have not been verifiably eliminated. And President Trump’s pledge of “no time limits” is already showing signs of strain as the campaign stretches on without toppling the regime. The risk is turning into a classic trap: impressive charts on briefing slides, but no decisive political outcome.
Iran’s strategy: Spread the fire
Tehran understands it cannot win a conventional air war. Its response is therefore asymmetric and expansive. Operation True Promise IV has unleashed waves of missiles and drones against Israel, US bases, and Gulf partners—Qatar, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Kuwait. The clear objective: fracture the US-Israel-Gulf coalition and force America to fight on multiple fronts simultaneously.
Most alarming is Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. Tanker traffic has plummeted 80 per cent, four vessels have already been hit, and insurance rates have soared to prohibitive levels. The Strait carries roughly 20 per cent of global oil and gas. Prices have spiked, hammering Asian economies and rattling Europe. The manoeuvre is shrewd: it compels US aircraft and ships to divert resources to escort duties and base defence instead of striking Iran—buying Tehran precious time.
The Gaza parallel reveals the trap
The two-year Gaza campaign of 2023 to 2025 offers a sobering lesson. Even against a tiny 365-square-kilometre flat territory with just two million people, air power alone proved insufficient; ground forces were ultimately required. Iran is an entirely different proposition: 1.65 million square kilometres, 89 million people, rugged mountains, vast deserts, and deeply buried facilities that shrug off airstrikes.
Unlike Gaza’s fractured factions, Iranians are now uniting against foreign attack; nationalism is overriding long-standing discontent with the regime. Any US or Israeli leader contemplating ground troops faces a political poison pill—body bags returning home and collapsing domestic support. Without boots on the ground, however, the Hydra simply keeps growing new heads.
Anvil holds, Hydra keeps growing
After one week, the battlefield scorecard favours the US and Israel: unchallenged air dominance, sharply reduced missile barrages, and a shattered Iranian navy. Yet the central political objective—regime collapse or surrender—still remains elusive. Choked sea lanes and proliferating side conflicts are buying Iran time. History is clear: air campaigns can win battles, but achieving lasting strategic goals usually demands ground forces and sustained political will. With sirens still sounding from Haifa to Doha, any talk of outright victory at this stage would taste like ash.