Black smoke climbs over the Persian Gulf as gas fields, power stations, civilian infrastructure and military sites across the region come under attack from Iran. Tehran says it will continue to retaliate in kind for US‑Israeli strikes on military, civilian and energy targets inside its borders — even as US President Donald Trump has repeatedly proclaimed Iran militarily defeated.
As the war stretches into its fourth week, pressure on Washington is growing. Rising energy prices are stoking inflation and economic uncertainty worldwide, but the US and Israel press on with their joint bombing campaign. Does any meaningful space remain for talks?
Marcus Schneider, who leads the Friedrich Ebert Foundation’s Regional Peace and Security Project in Beirut, is doubtful. “I am very skeptical at the moment,” he told DW. He argues that crucial interlocutors “are no longer around” after targeted killings removed senior Iranian figures who might have negotiated, leaving successors perceived as less willing to compromise. In the opening hours of the war on February 28, Iran’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei was reported killed; his son, Mojtaba Khamenei, was named successor but has not appeared publicly amid speculation of serious injury. Other senior officials, including security chief Ali Larijani, have also been assassinated, and Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said their spokesman was killed in an air strike.
Those losses have deepened a trust deficit. Stefan Lukas, director of Berlin’s Middle East Minds think tank, says Tehran has learned that attacks can occur even while talks are underway, reducing official appetite for negotiations with Washington. He allows that back‑channel contact — for example via Iraq or Oman — cannot be ruled out, but adds that “there will be no significant changes at the diplomatic level for the time being.”
For now, Iran’s leadership appears resilient. Schneider warns that the decapitation strategy may be counterproductive: removing leaders has not triggered rapid regime collapse, and merely surviving a conflict with the US is seen in Tehran as a kind of victory, according to analysis by the Middle East Institute. Iran’s so‑called “mosaic defense,” composed of semi‑autonomous units capable of operating without centralized command, reinforces that resilience.
Tehran also seems to be shifting its focus from seeking quick military breakthroughs to pursuing political and strategic effects. Its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and strikes on energy infrastructure have had immediate impact on global markets. “Why should Iran stop now?” Schneider asks, noting that wars are decided not just on the battlefield but politically — Tehran appears to be betting that its capacity to endure hardship may outlast that of its adversaries. While it cannot match US conventional military superiority, Iran can escalate in economic and strategic arenas where raw military power is less decisive, a view shared by international analysts.
Given the elimination of key negotiators, the erosion of trust, and Iran’s apparent shift toward endurance-based tactics, prospects for near‑term, substantive negotiations look slim.
This article was originally published in German.