The 12-day war between Israel and Iran can be considered a significant event in the Middle East's international relations that will have lasting effects. Israel started this intense conflict on June 13, 2025, by attacking Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan with missiles and airstrikes. The US-brokered ceasefire ended the conflict on June 24, following the destruction of the nuclear facilities by American B2 bombers, also known as bunker busters. The world has been rocked by this conflict. Israel is no longer invincible, and the three-layered air defence cover—Iron Dome, David's Shilling, and Arrow Arrow—has also lost its effectiveness. These weapons systems are set up to stop artillery, short-range rockets, long-range threats, and even planes, drones, rockets, and missiles. While Israel has demonstrated its military strength by destroying important Iranian military and nuclear sites, it has also established a deterrent in the region. The question we should be asking today is: what strategic advantages did Iran gain from this conflict? Iran's ability to endure, keep its regime stable, and use the fallout from diplomacy to its advantage, despite the difficulties it faced, suggests that it came away with gains that might enhance its influence in the region, especially among its non-state allies.

The war began on June 13, 2025, when Israel launched attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities, including Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, asserting that Iran's nuclear program posed an immediate threat and required urgent action. In addition to destroying these nuclear sites, the declared objectives included enacting regime change, destabilizing Iran internally, and dismantling the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to limit its support for regional allies. However, according to various sources, Israel and its partner, the United States, have failed to achieve any of these stated aims. Iran had moved enriched uranium from Fordow just days prior to the attacks in anticipation of such an assault. The Iranian regime now appears more stable, confident, and in control of its affairs, as the US-Israel attacks have inadvertently bolstered its public legitimacy. This aggression has emboldened the Ulema Council and Ayatollah Khamenei, garnering transnational sympathy across the Muslim world. Consequently, the 'Resistance' against Israel and the US may gain renewed momentum, as Iran recalibrates its strategy.

The US intervened with B-2 stealth bombers targeting the same nuclear sites, an operation described by the president as a "spectacular military success" and named "Operation Midnight Hammer". In response, Iran considered three potential courses of action: to choke the Strait of Hormuz and disrupt oil supplies; to target US military bases in the region; or to activate non-state actors to carry out attacks on US installations. Iran is acutely aware that obstructing the Strait would adversely affect China's energy supplies, as China is a long-term ally and purchaser of approximately 30 per cent of Iranian oil. Hence, Iran opted to symbolically strike the US's largest base at Al Udeid in Qatar as a reaction to the US operation. The attack on Al Udeid has signalled the beginning of diplomatic rapprochement and effectively brought the conflict to a close—a period now referred to as the 12-Day War. The 12-Day War represents a major change in the geopolitical landscape of the region, prompting both Iran and the United States to reconsider their strategies and alliances.

Despite Trump's announcement, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi asserted that no deal was being negotiated. While Israel performed well during the conflict, Iran's strategic position following the war presents a more intricate scenario. Iran has managed to transform adverse circumstances into several strategic gains discussed below.

Regime Survival and Domestic Cohesion

The most significant achievement for Iran has been the survival of its regime, the theocratic political structure, and the command-control apparatus. Despite Israeli elimination of military commanders, political advisors, and nuclear scientists aimed at weakening the ruling apparatus, the Islamic Republic has remained intact, allowing Iranians to preserve the regime and sovereignty.

The Israeli attacks have exhilarated the domestic support for the regime. The Iranian authorities, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, framed the conflict as a defence against "Zionist aggression." He rallied the Iranians in the name of revolution and Islam, garnering transnational support. Iranian public demonstrations against Israeli aggression have injected resilience into the regime, despite economic hardships and its unpopularity in certain quarters. The framing of the war resonated with the national pride of Iran, so President Masoud Pezeshkian’s remarks, “We neither initiated the war nor sought it, but we will not leave invasion unanswered,” resonated with Iranians, reinforcing national pride.

This public rallying behind leadership has enhanced internal cohesion and stability. In contrast to anti-regime protests earlier, the external threat has brought factions, including liberal moderates, anti-establishment, and civil society, together and pushed dissent sideways. Iran showed its strength by absorbing and surviving the onslaught from Israel and the US. Iran has established that its invincibility and resilience are derived from its civilisational past and resistance narrative. This domestic consolidation serves as a long-term benefit, providing a framework to strengthen power and pursue regional ambitions with renewed legitimacy.

Regional Influence and Anti-Israel Sentiment

The Iranian defence against the US and Israel's aggression has caused significant damage to their regional positions. Both are being considered aggressors, and in particular, Israel is considered an enabler of instability and a threat to regional peace. Israel tended to establish its hegemony by obliterating the Iranian nuclear programme and its alliance network in the region by portraying Iranian weapons as a threat to regional peace. However, Israel seems to have failed in diminishing the influence and positioning of Iran and its resistance narrative on its regional allies – the non-state actors in Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen and Iraq. These non-state allies will pursue Iranian resilience as a triumph of resistance regardless of severe setbacks since Israel's war on Gaza. The allies’ military strength and the Hezbollah and Houthis have been obliterated to a great extent; Iran's resilience would bolster these entities to reorganise and adopt a far more aggressive posture against Israel and its allies. The regional anti-Israel and anti-US public sentiment across the Middle East aligns with Iran’s narrative, portraying it as a champion of resistance.

Despite missile attacks on a US base in Qatar, Iran was quick to express that the attacks were not meant to undermine Qatar's sovereignty, referring to it as a "brotherly country", and ensured that the attacks would be a singular incident only to put pressure on the US to start diplomacy. Iran also agreed to Qatar's mediation for a ceasefire only if Israel stops its aggression. Saudi Arabia condemned Iran’s attack on Qatar; however, this condemnation has not resulted in a strain on the warming relations that have developed since China brokered rapprochement. Tehran has swiftly informed the US through Saudis that it is ready for negotiations, indicating that Tehran is not compromising its relations with the Gulf neighbours. Furthermore, the defiance Iran showed resonated with Arab publics, particularly in Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen, where Iran-backed groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis operate.

The 12-day war has also established the power of Iranian weapons systems, which are largely homegrown. Iranian drones and missiles have penetrated Israeli airspace and US bases, demonstrating their power while simultaneously strengthening Iran's deterrence posture, despite the significant deployment of missile arsenals. In strategic terms, Iran has gained the upper hand by exhausting the Israeli air defence, indicating that it can sustain pressure in a prolonged situation.

The 12-day war has strengthened Iran's partnership with Russia and China. The Iranian foreign minister's meeting with Russian premier Putin in Moscow post-war underscores this alignment; the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister has called the partnership “unbreakable”. This development strengthens Iran’s geopolitical leverage, establishing it as a key player in an anti-Western axis and increasing its influence in proxy conflicts and energy markets.

Ambiguity in the Nuclear Program

The US has created strategic ambiguity regarding Iran's nuclear program, despite claims from both the US and Israel that it has been destroyed. Iranian nuclear facilities have suffered damage, but the nuclear program remains intact. US intelligence has reported that US strikes have "set Tehran’s program back by months but did not eliminate it,” creating a strategic ambiguity and a paradoxical gain for Iran. These strikes will not halt Iran's ambition for a nuclear program, and it is speculated that Iran will assertively pursue one. Iranian deterrence strategy will benefit from this ambiguity. Iran will maintain a psychological advantage by leaving its enemies in suspense, neither confirming nor denying its progress towards developing a nuclear weapon. Iran has threatened to pull out of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, and Iran's national security committee has passed a resolution adopted by the parliament ending cooperation with the IAEA. Iran is signalling that it is rebuilding its nuclear program clandestinely. It is also clear that Iran might have secretly transported the enriched uranium from the Fordow facility to safe places. The 400 kg fissionable material demonstrates Iran's capacity to safeguard vital resources.

Global Sympathy and Diplomatic Leverage

Iran has experienced unprovoked aggression from Israel, occurring in the context of ongoing nuclear negotiations with the United States. The United States The Chinese ambassador to the United Nations cautioned that the situation may escalate uncontrollably, as both Russia and China have criticised the military actions taken by the United States and Israel. Russia asserted that there was "no justification for the U.S. attack and deemed the aggression against Iran unfounded." China articulated a robust condemnation, characterizing the aggression towards Iran as a breach of international law and a violation of the UN Charter.

Iran has maintained its diplomatic avenues over the course of twelve days, demonstrating a willingness, adaptability, and adherence to the principles of international engagement, which has contributed to garnering broader support. The conflict between Israel and Iran has revealed the inherent contradictions and unpredictability present within the United States. Trump has operated autonomously, disregarding both Congressional authority and prevailing public sentiment. For instance, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, representing the Democratic Party, underscored the schisms present in the United States by characterizing Trump's military actions as a "serious public acknowledgement" of unauthorised warfare. The incident has exacerbated the chasm within the nation, prompting numerous Americans to scrutinise the legality and ethical implications of Trump's actions.

Iran has acquired diplomatic leverage, particularly as Israel and the United States have chosen to overlook the IAEA reports indicating that Iran is not engaged in the development of nuclear weapons. This development has elicited apprehensions among US allies in the region, as well as within the broader international community.

Conclusion

Damage to Iran's nuclear program and infrastructure was among the many casualties of the 12-day battle. Still, Iran made several important strategic advances that might change its position in the region and the world. A military defeat became a strategic opportunity for Tehran when it preserved its regime, rallied domestic support, amplified anti-Israel sentiment, maintained nuclear ambiguity, and gained diplomatic influence. Some have characterised the battle as an act of "humiliation" for Iran, while others have viewed it as an opportunity for the Islamic republic to strengthen its resolve. Probably somewhere in the middle is where the truth lies. The ceasefire restricts Iran's capacity to fully exploit these advances, but its persistence in withstanding Israel's stronger weaponry and U.S. interference demonstrates its resilience. The future of the Middle East will be influenced by Iran's nuclear posture and its closer relations with Russia. The war is over, but its effects will be felt for a long time, and Iran is ready to benefit from its wins.

Dr. Mohmad Saleem Sheikh is a research assistant under an ICSSR-sponsored research project at the Centre for West Asian Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.