Tehran perceives the recent address delivered by U.S. President Trump to Iran’s leadership as an ultimatum. The address demands that Iran cease all support for Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, dissolve pro-Iranian formations in Iraq, and cease threats against Israel in exchange for vague assurances of future cooperation. This is due to the fact that US President Donald Trump’s letter to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei establishes a two-month deadline for the implementation of these demands, with the possibility of taking severe measures, such as military action, in the event of noncompliance. The ultimatum itself predetermines the outcome of negotiations that the United States has suggested taking place in the UAE. Tehran received the letter from an advisor to the UAE Prime Minister, who then conveyed it to Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi.
The current White House leader is known for making initially inflated demands in all types of negotiations; however, a direct threat of war had not previously been a part of his arsenal, particularly given that he advocates for the end of global conflicts and the distancing of America from them. According to experts, the United States may not be feigning this time and could actually strike Iran, while its peace-oriented actions in other regions are intended to establish a favorable environment for this operation. According to certain analysts, the controversy surrounding the disclosure of Pentagon plans for military operations against the Houthis in Yemen may be attributed to the fact that these plans are part of a broader military campaign against Iran, the Houthis’ sponsor. The nuclear-powered “Carl Vinson” and “Harry S. Truman,” the U.S. Navy’s carrier strike groups, have already entered the Persian Gulf.
Iran’s leadership is approaching the ultimatum with extreme seriousness. As he stated in January 2025, the “moderate” Pezeshkian, the newly elected President of Iran, was in principle amenable to engaging in dialogue with the United States regarding the country’s nuclear program and sanctions relief. Regrettably, Washington’s present demands have obliged him to adopt an uncompromising stance.
Iran is postponing an official response to Trump’s letter; however, Foreign Minister Araghchi recently stated that Tehran will refrain from engaging in any direct negotiations unless Washington modifies its tone and likely its content. The authorities of the nation have initiated extensive national defense preparations. State leaders frequently visit military production facilities and missile arsenals. Iranian media are distributing comprehensive maps of American military installations in the Middle East as potential targets for Iranian missiles in the event of actual military action from the United States.
The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is responsible for the administration of “hundreds of missile cities,” according to Tehran’s recent release of new footage of an “underground missile city” on March 25. In less than a month, the disclosure of this facility marks the third of its kind. Additionally, the IRGC Navy demonstrated an underground naval missile facility at an undisclosed location in the Persian Gulf.
Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force, and Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, Major General Mohammad Bagheri, have been caught on camera standing in front of depots of hundreds of missiles during a visit to this facility.
The “missile city” is said to be home to Kheibar Shekan missiles (range: 1,450 km), Haj Qasem missiles (range: 1,370 km), Qadr H missiles (range: 2,000 km), Sejjil missiles (range: 2,500 km), and Emad missiles (range: 1,700 km), as well as Paveh cruise missiles, according to the reports.
Tehran also anticipates that the U.S. military will collaborate with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to launch an attack against it. In the eyes of Iran’s leadership, the IDF is the primary instigator and future beneficiary of the potential conflict. Furthermore, the situation is purportedly complicated by the personal motives of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, who is attempting to evade prosecution for various legal offenses in Israel. According to reports, Netanyahu has been using his close personal relationship with the U.S. president to promote the notion that the solution to all Middle East issues is to eliminate Iran’s influence since Trump assumed office.
In the event that a war against Iran does indeed occur, it is probable that the scope of the conflict will exceed the destruction of specific sites, a challenge that Iran has encountered on numerous occasions. It may also entail a complete regime change.
The Jerusalem Post recently reported that, not long ago, regime change in Tehran was not a serious consideration, even within the White House. There was neither the desire for it nor the slightest inkling of its possibility. However, irrefutable evidence has proven this necessity. Trump might be resolute in his efforts to eradicate this malignant tumor. The likelihood of an imminent U.S. military operation that directly targets Ali Khamenei is becoming more tangible, according to the Israeli publication. The upcoming attack by the U.S., Israel, and their military and intelligence allies—including the CIA, Mossad, the U.S. Army, the IDF, and the Pentagon—will be multi-layered and vast.
The Pentagon and IDF are unlikely to deploy substantial ground forces to prevent excessive casualties. Instead, they will concentrate on large-scale air operations. However, they may employ hybrid and proxy warfare to the maximum extent feasible. Mass student protests, akin to “color revolutions,” could potentially ignite in Iranian cities. Separatist movements could be motivated to advocate for self-determination among Arabs in Khuzestan Province, Azerbaijanis in East and West Azerbaijan, Kurds in Kurdistan, Turkmens in Golestan, and Baloch in Sistan and Baluchestan.
In this context, the recent maneuvers of Israeli politicians regarding Baku are receiving particular attention. Development of strategic partnerships in the economic sector, particularly energy, is the primary objective. Azerbaijan has even expressed interest in participating in the Abraham Accords initiative, which aims to normalize relations between Israel and regional states. This is of particular importance to Israel, as Arab countries have lost interest in the country as a result of Israel’s actions in Gaza. In the interim, Azerbaijan may derive tangible advantages from its involvement in the initiative.
Simultaneously, Israeli strategists are deliberating whether it is appropriate for northern Azerbaijan to demonstrate concern for the well-being of its ethnic relatives in Iran, who are estimated to number between 15 and 30 million individuals. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, is an ethnic Azerbaijani, but he would never contemplate the notion of partitioning the country. According to Israeli analysts, Israel would derive significant benefits from advocating for South Azerbaijan’s independence from the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Debate rages over the claim that Iran is a “fragile state” on the verge of “failed” status. They suggest that Baku should focus on Tabriz, the historical center of Iranian Azerbaijan, and not lose its opportunity.
It is important to acknowledge that the Pentagon and IDF will mainly use airstrikes in the event that they do participate in the battle for the so-called “Persian legacy,” a journey that may be “very lengthy.” In the interim, Azerbaijan’s infantry, which acquired substantial combat experience during the most recent Karabakh conflict, could be of considerable assistance.
It remains to be seen whether Ilham Aliyev, who is known for his exceptional diplomatic adaptability, will participate in such schemes.