Portal partners
Is the US attack on Iran inevitable?
Author:Mariusz Dasiewicz
The growing tensions between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran have sparked another wave of speculation on the possibility of armed conflict in this part of the world. The relocation of American bombers to Diego Garcia and the rhetoric of President Donald Trump attract the attention of the media and public opinion. However, diplomatic activity is growing in the background – both from Iran and the Russian Federation – suggesting that a full-scale war scenario does not have to be inevitable.
In the article
Escalation and concentration of forces: Diego Garcia in the spotlight
One of the most eloquent signals of potential attack preparation is the relocation of US strategic bombers – both B-2 Spiritand B-52 - to a military base on Diego Garcia Island. It is an extremely convenient location – remote, difficult to attack and providing operational freedom over the entire Middle East.
According to the Federation of American Scientists analysis, approximately one third of the bomber fleet was deployed to Diego Garcia. B-2, which means the largest such arrangement in many years. In turn, satellite photos published by the portal The War Zone confirm the presence of six B-2 bombers and six KC-135 tankers on this island. Transporters also appeared next to them C-17 and exploratory aircraft P-8 Poseidone, creating comprehensive logistics and development facilities.
The presence of such a number of machines – with the ability to carry Bunker Buster GBU-57A/B ILO bombs, designed to destroy fortified underground structures – may indicate the interest of US military planners in key elements of Iran's nuclear and military infrastructure.
Trump rhetoric: pressure or announcement?
President Donald Trump openly threatened Iran with "a bombardment the world has never seen" unless Tehran returned to the negotiating table. Although such statements should be read in the context of negotiating tactics, their escalating tone combined with real military actions gives them an additional burden. However, it should be noted that USA conduct their policy towards Iran regularly pressures and resets – with caution on a full-scale war that could have disastrous effects on the energy market and the stability of the region.
Iran's defensive capabilities – would war be quick and unilateral?
Convincing a "fast victory" over Iran would be a strategic illusion today. The Islamic Republic has made significant technological progress: not only in the development of anti-aircraft systems and electronic combat measures, but also in the field of air forces – including the purchase of multi-purpose Su-35 combat aircraft from Russia, equipped with stealth detection capabilities.
Iran also has one of the largest ballistic missile fleets in the region capable of damaging American bases in Iraq, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. In addition, Tehran's missile forces announced readiness for immediate retaliation.
Attack as a "tactical option" – not a strategic objective?
Contrary to appearances, concentration of forces does not necessarily mean the intention to start war. This may be part of a classic deterrence strategy – a show of force to force diplomatic concessions. The very use of B-2, which is relatively outdated against Russia's and China's OPL systems, indicates that the purpose of their use may be Iran – an opponent of a lower-tech caliber. However, this does not mean that conflict will easy to win.
New quality in Iran's armed forces – Su-35 and anti-stealth capabilities
The modernisation of Iran's fighter aviation – in particular the acquisition of 24 Su-35 aircraft – significantly changes the system of forces in the region. These machines, Russian production, although formally not stealth aircraft, thanks to advanced optoelectronic systems and integration with anti-aircraft defense, provide very high combat value.
According to information provided by Iran's Tasnim agency, citing Mr Shahriar Heidari, the agreement with Russia also includes air defense systems, missiles and helicopters to be sent to Iran in the near future. Su-35 Delivery They coincide with the continued production of these aircraft for the Russian air-space forces – the first this year's party was handed over on 28 March 2025, as reported by the United Aviation Corporation.
This means that despite the losses suffered in Ukraine, Russia maintains its readiness to support Tehran with modern weapons – which only confirms how important this cooperation axis is to Moscow.
War Price: Economy vs Geopolitics
In the context of Donald Trump's plans to lower fuel prices and stabilise the American economy, the war with Iran appears to be a shot in the foot. Any conflict in the Gulf region immediately results in rising oil and gas prices, which has a direct impact on inflation in the US and the global raw material market.
It is also worth recalling that Iran has the opportunity to block the Strait of Ormuz, through which it flows almost 1/5 of the world's oil supply, which would mean a global energy shock. This is one of the main reasons why, despite aggressive rhetoric, American decision-makers always balance pressure and full-scale conflict.
Edge Balance
Although concentration of US forces and aggressive rhetoric could suggest preparations for the attack, the war with Iran is not a "fast effect – low cost". The modernisation of the Iranian armed forces, including the integration of platforms such as Su-35 with air defense systems, makes this country a difficult opponent for any aggressor – even such as the United States.
At the same time, starting a conflict with Iran would hit the pillars of the American and the global economy, which President Trump is committed to serving. Iran has repeatedly announced that in the event of aggression, it will block the Straits of Ormuz – one of the most important strategic points in global oil trade, through which up to 20% of global supply flows. It's a block. would cause a global energy shock, destabilising markets and increasing inflationary pressure – not only in the US.
It is worth noting, however, that despite military pressure, the scenario of full-scale war is not a dominant variant today. The Russian Federation declared readiness to mediate between Tehran and Washington, recognising the attack on Iran's nuclear installations as "illegal and destabilising". In turn, Iran, although reluctant to talk directly, signals the readiness to engage in indirect contacts in response to messages from the White House.
The current situation thus resembles more classical balancing on the edge, using military and economic pressure as instruments of influence – than the announcement of an open war. As long as diplomacy has room for manoeuvre and price conflict remains too high, it seems realistic to maintain tension within the limits of controlled escalation. In such conditions diplomacy – regardless of actors – remains not only an influence tool, but also the last barrier to a global geopolitical crisis.
Written by Marek Sęk
