Has Iran become more powerful after the 12-day war with Israel and the United States? Have other warplanes lost their effectiveness in today's wars? Will the role of drones and hypersonic and supersonic missiles with 2-ton warheads and radar-evading and vertical-flight missiles become more prominent in future wars? Did Iran set a model for future wars in this war to the world and Western countries?

Hossein Farzin added a reply::::

8 hours ago

Achieving a position of power following any military conflict depends largely on the realization of predetermined objectives within the framework of grand security-defense strategies. In the 12-day war between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Zionist regime, a precise assessment of the operational objectives of both sides and their degree of success in achieving these goals constitutes an essential component of strategic analysis of this event. Given the controlled media environment on both fronts, as well as the classified nature of information related to military operations, providing a comprehensive analysis at this stage presents certain challenges.

However, based on available verifiable data, it can be inferred that Iran's air defense systems and aerial sovereignty protection faced more significant challenges compared to the Zionist regime. This highlights the urgent need to revise defense strategies and strengthen security infrastructure. At the same time, this analysis does not negate the severe blows inflicted on the Zionist regime's defensive capabilities, as a final assessment of the military exchanges in this conflict requires more time and the release of more accurate information from reliable sources.

In response to your second and third questions, it is necessary to remind you of the decisive role played by American and Israeli fighter jets and bombers in this war, which shifted the military balance. According to most analysts, their impact was more significant than that of ballistic missiles and drones. Even if we were to emphasize the role of drones and missiles, the behind-the-scenes importance of air defense systems, long-range radars, and military satellites—which critically enhance the performance of missiles and drones—cannot be overstated. In this regard as well, Iran appeared more vulnerable.

This event underscores the necessity of prioritizing enhanced strategic resilience, improved deterrence capabilities, and strengthened regional security cooperation in Iran's defense policies. Additionally, the imperative to adopt advanced technologies in cyber warfare and electronic warfare stands out as one of the key lessons from this conflict.

Fatima Mohammed Habib added a reply

1 day ago

The aftermath of the so-called “12-day war” between Iran, Israel, and the United States—if examined through a strategic lens—reveals an important shift in how modern conflict is being understood, executed, and potentially redefined.

While it may be premature to say Iran has become more “powerful” in the traditional sense, what’s evident is that Iran has managed to reassert itself as a capable asymmetric actor. Its use of multi-domain tactics—particularly drone swarms, precision-guided munitions, and saturation missile strikes—highlighted how a state with limited conventional superiority can still project strategic deterrence. If anything, Iran demonstrated that resilience, adaptability, and hybrid tactics can offset technological gaps.

That said, the costs of such confrontation matter, and whether Iran’s internal political and economic structures can absorb those costs will ultimately shape whether this war enhances or erodes its long-term power.

As for traditional airpower—manned fighter jets and bombers—they haven’t become obsolete, but their dominance has been diluted. The increasing accuracy, autonomy, and affordability of unmanned systems and high-velocity missiles mean that air superiority is no longer guaranteed by having the most advanced aircraft. We’re moving into a battlefield where speed, stealth, and swarm logic are becoming more decisive than brute force.

Moreover, drones, hypersonics, and radar-evading cruise missiles—especially those with vertical-launch or loitering capabilities—are not just tactical tools. They’re shaping the strategic imagination of war itself. States now have access to systems that challenge the traditional monopoly of power projection once held by NATO or U.S. carrier groups.

Did Iran offer a model for future conflict? In some ways, yes. Not necessarily as a blueprint, but as a warning and a case study. For global powers, the war may underline the urgency of rethinking static defense systems. For smaller or sanctioned states, it may reinforce the idea that technological innovation and layered deterrence can carve out strategic space, even in an unequal fight.

In short, the war doesn’t signal Iran’s rise as a global power, but it certainly signals the rise of new forms of power—and those watching closely are already taking notes.

Recommended

Share

Heng Cui added a reply

19 hours ago

In 2023, Chinese public opinion had high expectations for Iran's pressure to confront Israel, but by 2025, there has clearly been a significant change in Chinese public opinion If readers are interested in reading Chinese comments on Zhihu and Station B, they will only see China's disappointment and mockery of Iran. You may also find that the most popular topic is to analyze why Iran is so weak, rather than think Iran is so strong.

Recommended

Share

إبراهيم خليل البلعزي added a reply

5 hours ago

The twelve-day conflict reinforced Iran’s deterrent posture through its ability to sustain missile and drone capabilities under sustained strikes, though significant damage to its infrastructure revealed limitations to its strategic depth. Meanwhile, U.S. and Israeli precision targeting demonstrated the enduring supremacy of advanced C4ISR systems, curbing Iran’s military escalation potential.

The conflict also highlighted a shift in airpower dynamics: drones and hypersonic missiles challenged the operational space of manned aircraft but did not render them obsolete. Instead, traditional warplanes adapted to operate from standoff ranges, coordinating with unmanned systems.

Modern fighter jets—such as the F‑35, F‑15EX, and Su‑57—remain vital to missions like air superiority and SEAD, provided they are integrated within multi-domain warfare networks. Thus, the war underscored not the obsolescence of airpower, but its transformation into a more networked, synergistic force component.

Martin Hilmi added a reply

3 hours ago

Pierre Razoux in 2015 published a book on the Iran Iraq war of the 1980s. Kindly see link: https://academic.oup.com/ia/article-abstract/92/3/746/2327106

What emerges from this book quite clearly is the Iranian stamina and character, that, i think few have fully realized in these current times.

Iran, recently, and yet again, faced a full scale aggression by two countries, based on some very scant and farcical evidence on supposed WMD development. This has created, on the political level, a good reason, to effectively take all measures by Iran for the right of self defence. This has seemingly made Iran far more prominent, and understandably, more prone to self defence, via all means. Iran is now in a position, seemingly, to alter its collaboration with the IAEA of the UN and the negotiations that were underway with the USA, for example.

It is amazing how few in decision making positions have really understood what they are up against in terms of Iran. It is the same mentality which brought the USA and its allies a humiliating defeat in Afghanistan after a 20 year war, which was lost on all levels: political, military, economic, social and culturally. Basically this humiliation, seems to be one of the driving forces behind the attacks on Iran. Further, the USA also was humiliated in Iraq politically, but not so much militarily, but still faced a terrible time for well over 10 years. yet, again, they will get much the same with Iran. Interestingly, making pre-emptive strikes to make a country safer, actually makes it more vulnerable. Israel has been fighting in Palestine for nearly two years now, in Lebanon, Yemen and Syria and now Iran, but the country is actually more vulnerable now, then before. This vulnerability is not only on the military front, but on the economic, political, social and cultural fronts. For example, see the ongoing genocide of Palestinians ...see the information on the economy ...see how Israel is still more vulnerable than before to being bombed ......................

Martin Hilmi added a reply

3 hours ago

This says it all

… Read more

• 270 kBFree Palestine.jpg