Denis Sitronovich: Recent Developments in the Washington-Tehran Confrontation Point to an Increasingly Dangerous Reality; Avoiding Another Round of Military Escalation Is Getting Harder / Both Sides Believe Retreat Would Cost More Than Continuing the Standoff / Iran's Leaders May Conclude They Cannot Wait for Washington to Seize the Initiative

Denis Sitronovich, member of the Atlantic Council think tank, wrote: Recent developments in the confrontation between Washington and Tehran point to an increasingly dangerous reality. Both sides still believe time is on their side, neither is willing to compromise on its core demands, and the diplomatic path is almost completely blocked. In such conditions, avoiding another round of military escalation is growing harder by the day.

Denis Citronovich, a member of the Atlantic Council think tank, wrote: The recent developments in the confrontation between Washington and Tehran indicate an increasingly dangerous reality: both sides still believe that the passage of time is in their favor, neither is willing to compromise on their main demands, and the path to diplomacy is almost completely blocked. In such a situation, it becomes more and more difficult to avoid another round of military escalation of tensions.

According to "Select" report; In the continuation of this article, several key developments show the depth of the current strategic impasse:

1. Iran is expanding its campaign against shipping in the Persian Gulf.

Tehran has intensified its attacks on oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz and its surrounding areas and is increasingly targeting ships even in ports across the Persian Gulf. Iran's leaders do not intend to accept a situation in which Iran's oil exports are prevented, but other producers in the region continue to export.

From Tehran's point of view, disrupting maritime traffic and keeping oil prices high are essential tools to put pressure on Washington. As it stands, there is little reason to expect this campaign to subside. On the contrary, the possibility of its further escalation increases day by day.

2. Tehran does not intend to surrender at the negotiating table.

Iran still insists on implementing the seven demands it has presented to the Trump administration. Iran's leadership is not willing to enter into serious and meaningful negotiations about its nuclear program before addressing these conditions.

On the other hand, Washington wants to move directly towards reaching a more comprehensive agreement on the nuclear issue. This fundamental difference over the order and sequence of negotiations has practically paralyzed the diplomatic process.

3. Iran believes that despite severe economic problems, it can finally win.

Tehran's strategic calculations go far beyond the lifting of sanctions. Iranian leaders believe that the current confrontation has provided an opportunity to redesign the security structure of the Persian Gulf, reduce the US military presence in the region and create a new reality in which Iran exerts much more influence on the Strait of Hormuz.

From this point of view, American threats and even more possible military attacks will not fundamentally change Tehran's calculations as long as the current system remains in power.

4. Iran is rebuilding its conventional military capabilities.

Despite the extensive losses that Iran suffered in the previous war, Tehran has made significant efforts to revive its missile and drone production capabilities.

It is unrealistic to assume that Iran has recovered its pre-war production capacity. However, reports of the resumption of missile and drone production, even on a limited scale, indicate that Iran is gradually rebuilding its military capabilities.

This process will continue regardless of immediate diplomatic developments.

5. The nuclear issue is still another source of strategic uncertainty.

Reports about the transfer of equipment to the Pickaxe Mountain facility suggest that Tehran may be preparing the necessary infrastructure to resume uranium enrichment.

This does not necessarily mean resuming enrichment or deciding to build nuclear weapons. Currently, the main focus of Iran's leadership seems to be on confronting Washington in the Persian Gulf.

However, the prospect of resuming enrichment adds another dangerous dimension to an already highly volatile situation.

6. Tehran benefits significantly from the confrontation between Saudi Arabia and the Houthis.

From Iran's point of view, the escalation of conflicts in Yemen brings two strategic advantages for Tehran.

First, Saudi Arabia is paying an increasing economic and security price for its military campaign. Second, Houthi attacks on Saudi infrastructure and regional transportation routes fuel instability in global energy markets and reinforce Tehran's broader goal of keeping oil prices high.

Therefore, Iran can benefit from this confrontation without necessarily entering the conflict directly.

7. Washington is strengthening its military formation, but has not yet been able to solve its fundamental strategic dilemma.

The Trump administration continues to deploy more military capabilities to the region, while refusing to offer meaningful economic concessions outside the framework of nuclear negotiations.

American officials emphasize the millions of barrels of oil that continue to flow out of the Persian Gulf and consider this a sign of the success of their strategy.

However, the US administration's efforts to reach out to Russian President Vladimir Putin show that Washington is also aware of the limitations of the current arrangement.

Oil may still be flowing, but that does not mean the Strait of Hormuz is back to normal trading and shipping activities. The current situation is costly, fragile and difficult to sustain in the long term.

8. The US government is now faced with three very difficult options.

First, it can accept at least part of Iran's demands and provide the ground for diplomatic opening; However, for now, this option seems unlikely.

Second, it can continue to apply economic pressure, hoping that Tehran will eventually change course; This is despite the fact that there is little evidence to show that Iran's leaders are approaching the stage of surrender or that the ruling regime is facing imminent economic collapse.

The third option is to resume military operations; With the hope that more strikes will force Iran to concede or produce a result that Donald Trump can claim as a victory.

The problem is that another military campaign may lead to tactical successes without fundamentally changing Iran's strategic calculations.

In addition, Tehran will respond to any renewed US military attack, and it is likely that the scope of Iran's response will expand both geographically and in terms of the type of targets attacked.

This response can also include new critical infrastructure; including submarine telecommunication cables and other strategic assets that have largely remained away from this confrontation.

In other words, the new American military operation will not only bring the risk of prolonging the war, but may turn the conflict into a regional and much wider conflict; A confrontation that can have severe consequences for the global economy and international relations.

9. Washington's main problem is the growing gap between its goals and the means available to achieve them.

Donald Trump wants to reach a major agreement on the nuclear field, but Tehran refuses to negotiate on this issue before the preliminary demands are met.

Economic pressure has not been able to get the desired points from Iran and military escalation does not provide any guarantee to achieve a better result.

Indeed, further U.S. strikes could lead to a wider regional confrontation, exacerbate disruptions in energy markets, and, at the same time, continue to dissuade Iran's leaders from compromise.