How the Israel-Iran War Ends

Three options for resolution

Same deal as yesterday! I’ll keep my Iran coverage free— all I ask is that people share it.

We have entered a critical phase in Iran. Let us not mince words: this war is won already. Israeli air supremacy has decimated Iran’s military infrastructure. At the same time, Iran’s missile salvos appear to be diminishing in scale daily as the IDF degrades Iranian launcher capability. Missiles have been intercepted for the most part, although they continue to inflict casualties.

Victory for Israel is a given at this point. The bigger question is, what does the endgame look like?

The future of the conflict hinges on three plausible endgames: a negotiated halt, a token result Iran can spin as a victory, or continued Israeli military pressure leading to regime change. Each scenario carries strategic risks that could reshape the Middle East for decades.

1. Negotiated Ceasefire or Diplomatic Deal

Under intense Israeli military pressure and global scrutiny, Iran may seek to end the war through a ceasefire or mediated diplomacy. Israeli strikes have destroyed key Revolutionary Guard command centres, degraded Iran’s missile stockpiles, and struck deep into Tehran. With its military hierarchy shattered and the regime fearing collapse, Iran has begun to explore exit routes. Reuters reports that Iranian officials have approached Gulf states and the US, offering “flexibility” on nuclear concessions in exchange for an immediate ceasefire. They have signalled readiness to suspend uranium enrichment and accept IAEA inspections, echoing Ayatollah Khomeini’s 1988 “poison cup” ceasefire during the Iran–Iraq War.

At the same time, Oman, Qatar, and the G7 have advocated for diplomacy to prevent a broader escalation. Oman proposed a 1–3 year enrichment freeze alongside an inspection regime.

The US possesses considerable leverage. While President Trump has supported Israel’s campaign, he has also publicly urged Iran to “talk immediately” and hinted at potential relief if Iran complies.

Iran’s foreign ministry announced it would halt retaliation if Israel ceased bombing. Although Iran insists it will not negotiate under fire, its backchannel diplomacy conveys a different narrative. The regime seeks a face-saving way out.

This is a surrender. A deal might involve Iran freezing or reversing its nuclear program, accepting inspections, and halting missile attacks. Israel, in turn, would suspend its airstrikes. The US could act as guarantor, offering Iran limited sanctions relief and Israel the assurance of long-term monitoring and enforcement.

The risks surrounding a negotiated end to the war are significant. Any agreement that emerges may suffer from fragile compliance; Iran might quietly resume nuclear activities once pressure eases, prompting Israel to retaliate and reignite hostilities. A humiliating climbdown could also trigger a regime legitimacy crisis in Tehran, pushing the leadership to intensify repression to maintain control and risking mass unrest.

Beyond the region, the global economy is vulnerable. If talks collapse and Israel strikes oil infrastructure or Iran attempts to close the Strait of Hormuz, energy markets could spike sharply. With oil prices already elevated, diplomatic failure could unleash global inflation or even recession.

2. Iran’s Best-Case Scenario

Closely linked to scenario 1, Iran may still claim a symbolic victory based on survival, defiance, and a negotiated end that prevents regime collapse.

In this outcome, the regime withstands Israel’s onslaught, retains key infrastructure such as the underground Fordow facility, and achieves some successful missile strikes on Israeli urban or strategic targets. Although its nuclear programme is damaged, it is not eliminated. Tehran avoids outright surrender and instead employs international diplomacy and regional pressure to freeze the conflict. Supported by countries like Oman, Qatar, and Russia, and bolstered by global fears of escalation, Iran will advocate for a ceasefire that halts hostilities while preserving its regime and negotiating position.

This option appears unlikely at the moment.

In both scenarios 1 and 2, the regime would frame it as a heroic stand: Iran “resisted Zionist aggression,” inflicted damage on Israel, and emerged intact. State media would highlight Israeli casualties and missile damage as proof of Iranian strength, while portraying international ceasefire efforts as evidence that the world fears Iran’s power. This narrative of resilience could temporarily bolster the regime’s fragile legitimacy.

However, this “victory” would be highly costly and precarious. Israeli strikes have devastated Iran’s military infrastructure, degraded the leadership of the IRGC, and set back its nuclear programme, albeit not permanently. The economy, already crippled by sanctions, would be in an even worse condition, with oil facilities, airports, and industrial sites all damaged. Rebuilding would take years.

Another risk here would be that Iran overplays its propaganda. If it claims victory while ordinary Iranians endure shortages, casualties, and economic hardship, public patience may wear thin. The regime’s narrative could ring hollow, and future unrest could erupt once the rally effect fades.

Twenty months ago, it would have been unthinkable that the best possible endgame for Iran at this point is survival without capitulation, spun as victory. Yet here we are. The regime will aim to avoid collapse, preserve sovereignty, and claim the moral high ground, but it comes at a high cost. This outcome postpones rather than resolves the conflict with Israel, and leaves Iran more brittle than before, with strategic dangers lurking just ahead.

A fire blazes in the oil depots of Shahran, northwest of Tehran, on June 15, 2025. © Atta Kenare, AFP

3. Israeli military victory and regime collapse

If Iran does not find a way to reach a deal, Israel will capitalise on its advantage and try to collapse the Iranian regime. The IDF, having achieved air supremacy, will target the regime’s backbone: command bunkers, nuclear facilities, oil infrastructure, and symbols of state authority.

At this stage, there is nothing at all to stop Israel from relentlessly pounding Iran until it surrenders. There seems to be no shortage of ammunition, and American resupply can happen at will. Despite international media attempts to portray a tit-for-tat scenario, it has been an overwhelming victory for Israel. This is not even a debate.

The challenge now is to force Iran into the endgame of Israel’s choice. Dozens of IRGC generals have been killed; Israel has struck central Tehran, oil refineries, and even the state television studios. Netanyahu has stated Israel now “controls the skies over Tehran” and has hinted that killing Supreme Leader Khamenei could end the war.

The strategy appears two-pronged: neutralise Iran’s offensive capability and psychologically weaken the regime. Reports suggest that parts of the Iranian elite are fleeing or hiding, while civilian panic in Tehran mounts. A regime implosion could occur through military collapse, a popular uprising, or a palace coup. Israel would declare victory if the Islamic Republic fell and a successor regime renounced nuclear ambitions and hostility. Yesterday, I discussed in depth how we get there and what this option could look like in practice. You will see that it is not without significant long-term risks.

Conclusion

In just three short days, the Israel–Iran war is at a crossroads. A negotiated ceasefire may yet end hostilities, but it hinges on Iran’s willingness to climb down and Israel’s readiness to pause. An Israeli military victory could break the regime, but risk dangerous instability down the line.

To repeat my own words from yesterday, “The coming days will test whether Iran’s 85 million people can seize this moment to build something new… or whether the aftermath becomes a new tragedy.” Time is short. The decisions made now will have a lasting impact for generations.

One final lingering concern: beware hubris and never underestimate your enemy. Always be ready for one last roll of the dice from the Iranians. This has been militarily easy so far: Iran may have one last sucker punch to throw.

I have a weekly podcast with Shana Meyerson, “A Paratrooper and a Yogi Walk Into A Bar”, so please do check it out! Find it in the podcast section of my Substack page, or:

YouTube

Apple Podcasts

Spotify