Why it matters:
Larijani's assessment directly counters U.S. assumptions about the scope and duration of the current confrontation, signaling that Iran's strategy envisions a multi-phase campaign rather than a single retaliatory strike—a calculation that could reshape decision-making in Washington.
The big picture:
The joint U.S.-Israeli strikes that martyred Iran's Leader and top commanders represent the latest chapter in a 45-year campaign of aggression against the Islamic Republic—from the U.S.-backed 1980 Saddam Hussein invasion through decades of assassination campaigns, economic warfare, and now open military attack. Tehran views this war as an existential confrontation imposed by Washington and Tel Aviv, who miscalculated that decapitating Iran's leadership would cripple the nation's resolve.
What he's saying:
"Iran is prepared for a long-term war, unlike America's readiness. Just as over the past 300 years, Iran has never been the initiator of war, and our brave armed forces have not launched any attack except in defense—we will decisively defend ourselves and our 6,000-year civilization, regardless of costs, and will make the enemies regret their miscalculation."
Go deeper:
Larijani's strategic calculus reflects a core principle of Iran's defense doctrine: asymmetrical warfare combined with strategic patience. While the U.S. possesses overwhelming conventional firepower, its political system imposes constraints on prolonged military engagements—a vulnerability Iran has studied from Vietnam through Afghanistan and Iraq. By committing to a "long-term" response, Tehran aims to outlast American political will, forcing Washington to choose between escalation or withdrawal.
ahmad shirzadian
