jordan pulse -

​By Ahmad Abdul-Basit Al-Rajoub
​The Middle East region continues to witness an ongoing escalation in tension between the United States and Iran, amid clear indicators that the conflict has entered a more complex and dangerous phase. As prospects for a political settlement wane, the pace of military movements is rising and the nature of confrontations is changing, shifting from traditional exchanges of strikes to a new pattern of operations reflecting a fundamental shift in the military doctrine of both parties. Concerns are growing that the entire region could slip into a full-scale regional confrontation, particularly with overlapping international interests and complicated strategic calculations.
​As I pointed out in my previous article titled "The Iranian Oven... Will It Consume Both Trump and Netanyahu?", the current U.S. administration has been drawn behind the promises of the occupying entity to launch an aggression against Iran that began with the bombing of a children's school in Minab, ignoring warnings from former U.S. military leaders against slipping into an Iranian quagmire. These experts viewed the war on Iran as a "strategic disaster" that could ignite the region, given Iran's vast geographic expanse, complex terrain, and possession of the largest arsenal of ballistic missiles in the region.
​The Iranian Military Shift: From Numerical Saturation to Qualitative Strikes
​The Iranian military strategy has witnessed a prominent shift recently, as Tehran transitioned from the tactic of dense attacks using missiles and drones to executing more precise operations targeting command centers, air defense systems, and sensitive military infrastructure. According to military analysis, this evolution reflects an Iranian response to a series of strikes targeting strategic facilities and prominent leadership figures, prompting the Iranian military leadership to reassess its combat methods and focus on limited-scope but more impactful qualitative strikes.
​In this context, the use of the "Arash 2" drone—known for its ability to hunt radars—emerged as a model of this new orientation, which relies on blinding and neutralizing air defense systems prior to executing main strikes, reflecting an advanced understanding of modern warfare requirements. Here, it is worth noting what I addressed in my article "The Iranian Oven," where I clarified that Iranian development was not limited to technical aspects, but extended to leadership. After the American-Zionist duo relied on the "shock and awe" theory, delusionally believing that assassinating the Supreme Leader and senior commanders would lead to the collapse of the regime, the Iranian response came completely to the contrary: the leadership absorbed the shock quickly and responded by striking American bases in the region and destroying strategic Israeli facilities.
​Electronic Warfare and Advanced Navigation Technologies
​Electronic warfare currently tops the forefront of the conflict, with parties to the conflict employing sophisticated offensive means targeting radar and air defense systems to reduce their ability to detect and intercept missiles and drones. It is worth mentioning and pointing out the possibility of Iran benefiting from advanced navigation technologies and alternative satellite systems, which could limit the impact of electronic jamming operations relied upon by U.S. forces.
​Remarkably, estimates indicate an increasing reliance by the Iranian side on the Chinese "BeiDou" navigation system as an alternative or complement to the U.S. GPS system, which could grant missiles and drones greater accuracy in guidance and reduce the effectiveness of U.S. electronic warfare. In this framework, the Chinese system is described as a "sky eye" providing more stable vision and navigational information in an electronic warfare environment, affording Iran the ability to maneuver and compensate for any loopholes in Western navigation systems.
​The Chinese and Russian Role: An Eye in the Sky and an Eye on the Ground
​The confrontation in the Middle East is no longer limited to the United States and Iran; rather, it reflects broader strategic dimensions where the interests of major powers interlock, chiefly China and Russia. Beijing and Moscow monitor the course of the conflict as a real testing ground for the capabilities of Western weapons, air defense systems, and electronic warfare, seeking to extract lessons that can be utilized in any future confrontations.
​According to analysis, China plays a technical role by providing advanced capabilities in space navigation and communications, while Russian military expertise gained during the war in Ukraine—particularly in electronic warfare and drone swarm management—constitutes an important source of knowledge that Iran could benefit from. Thus, the convergence of Chinese technical capabilities with Russian field expertise may explain part of the development seen in Iranian capabilities in reconnaissance, navigation, and operational planning, turning the current conflict into part of a broader geopolitical competition among major powers, offering these two countries a golden opportunity to study modern military tactics and extract lessons that could be decisive in future conflicts.
​American Challenges: Three Fronts and Strategic Attrition
​The U.S. administration faces growing challenges in determining its upcoming path, amid the rising cost of military operations and the difficulty of achieving decisive strategic goals. As I analyzed in my article "The Iranian Oven," after two weeks of war, the American-Zionist duo failed to achieve the declared objective of destroying the nuclear program or overthrowing the regime, facing double embarrassment on both the field and political levels. Discussions taking place in the corridors of the White House and the Pentagon point to strategic confusion in the face of three open fronts that cannot be easily contained, at a time when fears escalate over the expanding circle of confrontation to include other regional parties, along with the resulting economic and security repercussions affecting the stability of energy markets and the global economy.
​Washington finds itself today before a difficult equation, facing an escalating war of attrition from which Russia and China might be the primary beneficiaries by testing Western weapons capabilities and draining American resources in a complex conflict environment. In this context, I previously cautioned in my article "The Iranian Oven" that the repercussions of the war were not limited to Iran, but extended to Gulf states that found themselves in the crosshairs despite declaring neutrality, with Gulf figures expressing resentment, describing what is happening as "dragging the Gulf into a conflict in which it was not a party," increasing the complexity of the scene and placing Washington in an embarrassing position with its traditional allies in the region.
​The Trust Crisis and Faltering Diplomacy
​The lack of trust between Washington and Tehran represents the main obstacle to any political progress, as each side views the other as uncommitted to its previous pledges, making opportunities to return to the negotiating table limited at present. Under this reality, the language of deterrence and escalation continues to dominate the scene, while opportunities to reach diplomatic solutions capable of containing the crisis decline. This gap deepens as military operations continue, with each party appearing attached to its coercive options, believing that the language of force is the only way to impose its conditions.
​Conclusion: On the Brink of the Abyss
​The Middle East stands today at a critical crossroads, where military calculations interlock with international rivalry, and the risk of miscalculation or unintended escalation remains ever-present. Although estimates differ regarding the path events will take, most analyses agree that the upcoming phase will require intensive diplomatic efforts to prevent the expansion of the conflict, at a time when military options remain strongly present on the table for all parties.
​In conclusion, as I deduced in my article "The Iranian Oven," Iran has proven that it is neither Afghanistan nor Iraq, and that entering its hot "oven" is far more difficult than leaving it. The most important question posing itself today: Can Washington regain its dominance in the region, or has the "attrition" trap led by Russia and China already succeeded in redrawing the map of influence in the Middle East? The answer to this question will be determined in the coming months, but what is certain is that the region stands on the brink of the abyss, and any miscalculation could lead to a broader confrontation with devastating repercussions for the security of the region and the stability of the entire world.
​Strategic Researcher and Planner - Jordan