Name: Iran’s strategy is ‘avoid being coerced into negotiations’ | DW News
Uploaded: 2026-03-16T17:05:10.000Z
Duration: 15 min 16 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

We're entering the third week of the U. S.

Israeli war against Iran, and so far there's no end of the conflict in sight.

Sentences with advanced comparative

Iran's supreme leader has been killed as well as some 3,000 other Iranians.

The US claims its ultimate goal is to destroy Iran's ability to project its military power beyond its borders.

However, US President Trump himself has repeatedly called on Iranians to topple their own government inside the United States.

Polling indicates most Americans oppose the war, and

some US Officials have hinted that the conflict could end in a matter of weeks.

But let's take a listen to what the Israel Defense Forces spokesman had to say today about Israel's war plans.

We have an orderly, well planned combat strategy.

We have thousands more targets in Iran, and we generate additional targets every day.

The regime is already weakened and we continue to weaken it more and more each day.

But despite the confidence on the side of the United States and Israel, Iran seems ready to dig in.

Let's bring up the latest comments from Iran's foreign minister.

We're defending our people from this act of aggression.

We don't see any reason why we should talk with the Americans.

We were talking with them when they decided to attack us.

There's no good experience talking with the Americans.

Let's bring in Sarah Harmouche to answer some of those questions.

She's founder of H9 Defense and a defense policy researcher.

As we just heard there, there seems to be no interest in peace talks in Tehran despite the heavy strikes.

What logic do you think that the regime is following?

The regime's logic is avoid appearing coerced into negotiation.

It's been its entire history, Iran's always relied on deterrence and regime logic, like regime survival logic rather than immediate battlefield victory.

So Iran's strategy emphasizes absorbing punishment or while preserving regime authority and deterrence credibility.

Iran's military posture is entirely built around endurance and retaliation rather than conventional dominance.

So entering right now during active time of escalation and after immediately heavy strikes could be interpreted domestically as a strategic weakness.

And Iran does not want to communicate that and tries to avoid appearing weak or signaling any vulnerability.

So Tehran tends to signal resilience but at first and then explore diplomacy if it believes it has restored deterrence.

So if I'm understanding you correctly, their current goal is to extend the war until the campaign is, what, too costly or too unpopular to continue.

Will they be Looking to negotiate a peace deal.

The short answer is yes, I do think Iran is trying to extend the war.

Iran knows and its leadership, they know they cannot defeat Israel and the United States in a conventional war.

So instead they rely on increasing the political and economic cost of continuing conflict.

And which is why they've also invested heavily in missiles, drones and proxy networks specifically to sustain prolonged pressure.

So the objective is not necessarily military victory for Iran.

Iran wants to change the political calculus of its adversaries by increasing the cost of continued operations.

And we've seen them do that and focus on economic targets, whether it was striking the Gulf countries, oil refineries, gas facilities threatening with the Strait of Hormuz.

And we've seen gas prices increase, we've seen oil prices increase.

So Iran seems to be focused on targeting the economic and the luxury land, land and locations in the Gulf in order to increase the cost of this, this war and focus on war of attrition and strategies of attrition and cost imposition in order to pressure the US and pressure Israel to alt the war.

Now, as we heard there just a moment ago, Iran's foreign minister says this isn't a war of survival.

It does not always communicate what is actually happening and it will never say publicly that it is a war of survival or it's losing or it's weak because then that would weaken its domestic narrative of strength.

So publicly acknowledging a war of survival would signal vulnerability and potentially weaken the regime's domestic.

And also Iranians have long framed conflicts as defensive but manageable confrontation.

They would not want to frame it ever as an existential struggle.

Domestically it assures the people that the state remains stable and strong.

And internationally it communicates that.

It communicates that it's ready to escalate.

But this escalation could still be controlled.

Now let's turn our eyes to the domestic front.

In Iran, before the war, we saw the government put down popular protests against the regime with deadly efficiency, killing thousands.

How tight is the government's grip on power inside the country?

Despite the strikes and the leadership targeting and the death of Ali Khamenei and the the no appearance of Mushtaba Khanmini, who the new supreme leader, the Iran state retains significant coercive capacity.

Iran's security apparatus includes the Iranian Revolutionary Guard and the besieged militias which are entrenched and remain deeply entrenched in the political system.

So while the public dissatisfaction is real, the regime still maintains strong internal security institutions in capable of suppressing unrest.

Now, if the current trajectory continues, do you see this conflict being over in a matter of weeks like some officials have indicated, or do you think we're looking at a much larger conflict and longer conflict rather that is uncertain.

This war has many actors and it has many different variations of what could happen.

We've seen Iran's strikes on the Gulf countries.

Whether they decide to strike back and retaliate, that would definitely expand the war.

Also seen the front in Lebanon with Hezbollah open and we've seen the war expand there.

We have not seen it, seen it expand yet in Yemen with the Houthis.

However, statements of Houthi officials last week have stated that they are ready to fight militarily if Iran, if Iran wants them to join.

So there are different actors to consider.

There seems to be a little gap between what each wants.

President Trump does not seem to necessarily care about regime change where Israel does care about regime change.

Also we've seen missile exchanges and limited strikes, which those can continue for weeks and months because they do not require large troop deployments.

But the sustainability of the conflict also depends on munition stockpiles, political tolerance for risk and international pressure.

And in many regional conflicts, wars end not because one side wins decisively, but because the cost becomes.

The cost of escalation becomes unacceptable.

So it will depend on all of these factors and then how long can Iran impose cost and how long are other actors willing to tolerate it and when do they stop?

So do you see any possible diplomatic off ramp at this hour?

Diplomacy right now, especially during times of active escalation, is difficult, but it's not impossible.

We've seen them, but we've seen them happen before.

There could be indirect mediation talks via Qatar or Oman.

We've seen this before happen where they facilitated communication between the US and Iran there.

Also during war times there are back channel diplomacy which could also happen.

Or there could also be another scenario of a mutual de escalation formula where all sides start to de escalate, escalate strikes without formally acknowledging a ceasefire.

But most conflicts in the region eventually de escalate through back channel and quiet diplomacy rather than public negotiations.

All right, we're going to have to leave it there.

That was Sarah Harmouch defense policy researcher and founder of H9 Defense.

And let's take a look now outside of Iran's borders with Mehrzad Borrer Jardi.

He's an expert on Iran and Middle Eastern politics at Missouri University University of Science and Technology.