[Bloomberg Column] Iran Faces Three Options... Only One Offers Hope

James Stavridis, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and former U.S. Navy Admiral.

This past weekend, when the United States launched airstrikes on three of Iran's key nuclear facilities, the world responded with a range of reactions. There was relief that Tehran's nuclear weapons program would be significantly set back, admiration for the precision of the U.S. military operation, and concern that this could trigger deadly retaliation from Iran. For me, these events brought back personal memories.

The time was just before the 1979 Iranian Revolution. I visited Iran briefly while serving on a U.S. Navy destroyer, docking at the southern port city of Bandar Abbas to refuel. This strait is a vital artery for global energy transport, with more than 20% of the world's oil and gas passing through it.

During a short stay on a rooftop, I interacted with Iranian naval officers and could clearly sense their pride. It was understandable. At that time, we were about to deliver four newly built guided-missile destroyers from the United States to Iran, which were set to become the mainstay of the Iranian Navy. However, not long after, the revolution broke out, and those destroyers were incorporated into the U.S. Navy as Kidd-class destroyers, where they served successfully for many years.

Today, American society tends to view Iran as a mere "troublesome middle power" in the Middle East. But Iranians do not see themselves that way. They regard themselves as descendants of the great Persian Empire, which ruled over 40% of the world's population 2,500 years ago. Modern Persians now face a reality far removed from that former dominance, as Israel and the United States have been weakening or neutralizing the military power of armed groups within Iran's sphere of influence, such as Hamas, Hezbollah, the Assad regime in Syria, and the Houthi rebels.

With the latest U.S. airstrikes, Iran's core nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan were hit. As a result, Iran's leadership now needs a new strategy to regain its status and influence. There are not many options. So, what path will Tehran choose?

The scenario hoped for by the United States and Israel is that Tehran comes to a realization?in other words, unconditional surrender. In this scenario, having witnessed Israel's overwhelming military power and the U.S. deployment of B-2 bombers and bunker-buster bombs, Iran's leaders would call for peace, voluntarily abandon their nuclear program and materials, and acknowledge that they no longer have the right to enrich uranium. While not entirely impossible, the prevailing view is that this is extremely unlikely, given the regime's instability and the strong pride of its leadership.

The much more likely second scenario is that Iran salvages whatever it can from the nuclear facilities destroyed in the strikes, hides them, and at the same time carries out retaliatory attacks to save face. It is also possible that some nuclear materials or equipment were moved elsewhere before the airstrikes.

Iran's territory is more than twice the size of Texas, and there may be additional "secret facilities" that have not yet been discovered. Borrowing the words of former U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, these are "known unknowns."

Iran will likely launch missile and drone attacks against the United States and Israel, aiming to minimize casualties while preserving its dignity. The main targets are likely to be U.S. forces stationed in Syria and Iraq, U.S. Navy vessels in the Persian Gulf, and U.S. Air Force bases in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Qatar.

If the U.S. defense systems manage to intercept most of these attacks, both sides could return to the negotiating table. At that point, Steve Witkoff, the U.S. Special Envoy for the Middle East, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio would likely represent the United States in diplomatic talks.

The most concerning scenario is if Iran chooses a strategy aimed at delivering a major blow to the United States. This scenario consists of three axes of attack. The first is the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has conducted military exercises for decades in preparation for this?laying hundreds of naval mines, sinking civilian vessels, and deploying mobile missile batteries along the coast. While the West has the means to neutralize these measures, Iran could still achieve a temporary blockade effect.

The second is attacks on American civilians. Since diplomats and high-ranking military officials are heavily guarded targets, Iran may target American CEOs or executives residing in the Middle East. Additionally, Iran could employ a hostage strategy, such as kidnapping Western journalists?a tactic proven effective by Hamas.

The third is the escalation of cyber warfare. Iran already has a track record of launching cyberattacks against Saudi Arabia's energy infrastructure over the past 20 years. This time, the goal could be to disrupt global oil and gas networks, causing a spike in oil prices, inflation, and divisions among allied nations.

No matter which strategy Iran chooses, the door to diplomacy has not been completely closed. However, I am reminded of yet another path. It is a path that lies in the hands of the Iranian people, not Tehran's religious and military leadership.

This would be for Iran's 90 million citizens to change the regime themselves. When a country with such a long tradition and great heritage recognizes how much it has become corrupt and declined, the seeds of true change can begin to sprout.

Of course, the likelihood of an immediate revolution seems low. Foreign airstrikes often provoke public backlash and foster internal unity instead. However, today's Iran increasingly resembles Tsarist Russia in the early 20th century.

As in Russia during that era, an oppressive authoritarian regime appears to maintain absolute control on the surface by mobilizing police, military, and intelligence agencies to thoroughly suppress the population. However, such a regime can suddenly collapse at any moment.

Tehran's corrupt theocratic regime is now precariously shaking. And perhaps, for the first time in decades, the Iranian people have a real opportunity to bring down this regime.

If the religious leadership chooses to "go big" with an all-in strategy, I hope the people will decide not to join them. I hope they will refuse to participate in a reckless path that would only provoke even stronger retaliation from the United States.

James Stavridis, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, former U.S. Navy Admiral, and Vice Chairman of Global Affairs at the Carlyle Group

This article is a translation by Asia Economy of the Bloomberg column Iran Has Three Options Now. Two Are Terrible.