MEF Dispatch: Iran's 'Performative Attack'--and Its Isolation; What's Next for Reza Pahlavi?

Iran's 'Performative Attack'--and Its Isolation; What's Next for Reza Pahlavi?

By Winfield Myers ● Jun 23, 2025

Smart Brevity® count: 8 mins...2077 words

Iran’s attack earlier today on the U.S. air base at Al Udeid, Qatar, was “performative,” writes Michael Rubin, designed to satisfy hardliners at home while tipping off the U.S. and Qatar in the hope of staving off escalation. Little wonder, as Iran is isolated in its fight against Israel and the U.S., says Jonathan Spyer, with no major power interesting in fighting alongside it.

Shay Khatiri argues that it’s high time for Reza Pahlavi to get his organization in order, act decisively, and move to the region—or “disappear from politics and allow someone else to emerge.”

We also feature the work of Lazar Berman, Michel Gurfinkiel, and Mardo Soghom.

Watch: June 23, 2025 | Israel-Iran War Monitor

Join the Middle East Forum's Iran War Monitor, hosted by Executive Director Gregg Roman, for critical analysis following last week's unprecedented U.S. and Israeli military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities.

Distinguished panelists; Michael Rubin (AEI Senior Fellow and MEF Director of Policy Analysis); Jim Hanson (former Special Forces officer and MEF Chief Editor); Jordan Cope (MEF Qatar Finance Fellow); Karys Rhea (MEF writing fellow); Gil Hoffman (executive director of Honest Reporting); Jonathan Spyer (MEF director of research); Dexter Van Zile (managing editor of Focus on Western Islamism); Alex Selsky (Director of MEF’s Israel Victory Project); and Eric Navarro (Director of MEF's Red Sea Security Initiative) assess the strategic impact of Operation "Midnight Hammer" and Israel's "Operation Rising Lion," examine Iran's nuclear program status following the IAEA's non-compliance declaration, evaluate potential Iranian retaliation including threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, and discuss implications for regional stability and U.S. policy options.

With oil prices surging and diplomatic channels collapsed, this timely discussion brings together unparalleled expertise in Iranian affairs, military operations, and Middle East strategy to analyze whether recent strikes achieved their objectives or accelerated the nuclear crisis. Special guests may join to provide additional insights on this rapidly evolving situation that has transformed U.S.-Iran relations and regional security dynamics.

To watch the full broadcast, click here.

Iran’s Revenge Attack May Have Been ‘Performative’

Iran's missile strike on Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar was a calculated, symbolic act, not a genuine military escalation.

Why it matters: This move aligns with Supreme Leader Khamenei’s strategy to appease domestic hardliners while signaling to the U.S. that Iran does not seek a broader conflict.

By targeting an evacuated base, Iran conveys strength without provoking a major U.S. military response.

The big picture: This act mirrors past tactics, like the post-Soleimani strike, and serves dual audiences: Iran's hardliners and international observers skeptical of U.S. military presence.

Khamenei's approach involves public threats followed by controlled, low-risk actions, maintaining domestic support while managing international tensions.

What's next: Expect a return to backchannel diplomacy as Iran seeks de-escalation pathways.

This strike opens an offramp for both Iran and the U.S. to reduce tensions without appearing weak.

The question remains if Khamenei will compromise on Iran’s nuclear ambitions to foster long-term stability.

The bottom line: Iran’s strike was a strategic move to balance internal and external pressures, signaling a potential shift toward diplomatic resolutions.

To read the full article, click here.

Iran Is Isolated Against the U.S. and Israel

America’s entry into the war against Iran is the latest step up an escalation spiral that began in October 2023.

Why it matters: This development shifts the dynamics. The notion that the Trump administration will be dominated by isolationism can be laid to rest.

The confrontation now pits the U.S. and Israel against Iran, highlighting deep-rooted geopolitical tensions.

The big picture: Iran finds itself isolated as no major power supports its war efforts against the U.S. and Israel.

Despite increased cooperation among anti-Western states like China and Russia, there is no crystallized alliance to aid Iran.

What's next: Tehran faces limited options, ranging from potential nuclear escalation to strategic retreats.

The possibility of a new nuclear deal or increased proxy warfare are potential paths.

Each option carries significant risks of further U.S. countermeasures and global isolation.

The bottom line: Supreme Leader Khamenei and his isolated regime have few good options at present. Whichever one they take, they are likely to be privately cursing the memory of their brother and comrade Yahya Sinwar, deceased former Hamas leader, whose decision to launch the massacres in October 2023 has led directly to Tehran’s current predicament.

To read the full article, click here.

Iran May Close Strait of Hormuz: ‘Take the Oil’ and Sink the Navy

Iran’s parliament voted to close the Strait of Hormuz following U.S. bombings of Iranian nuclear sites. Even though the move is more symbolic than real, the United States and its allies should counter any move to interfere with freedom of navigation and commerce across a major waterway, especially one in which its Arab allies depend for their commerce.

Why it matters: The Strait is critical for global oil transport, and any disruptions could adversely affect international commerce and energy markets.

Iran's reliance on the Strait for its own oil exports makes the closure more symbolic than practical.

U.S. strategy: If Iran closes the Strait, the United States should seize Kharg Island to maintain pressure on Iran without damaging long-term infrastructure.

Kharg handles 90 percent of Iran's crude exports; occupying it would strain Iran financially while preserving future economic recovery potential.

Military action: Targeting Iran’s two navies could neutralize threats to regional stability.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy, known for harassment and smuggling operations, should be prioritized.

Ultimatums to Iranian vessels in the Indian Ocean could limit Iran's regional influence.

The bottom line: The United States must take care to limit damage to Iran itself for two reasons: First, the Iranian people are not an enemy, and second, the less damage Iran suffers, the easier it will be for the country to recover once Iranians throw off Khamenei and his fellow clerics.

To read the full article, click here.

Iran Regime’s Survival Will Cost More Lives than War

As Israel targets military and government sites in Iran, Iranian dissidents criticize the "No to War" protests in the West as regime orchestrations.

Why it matters: The opposition claims these protests deflect attention from Iran's actions, helping the regime survive Israeli strikes.

Tehran uses its diaspora networks to pressure Israel, misleading some and involving others with ties to the regime.

Opposition's stance: Monarchists, republicans, and activists directly blame the regime for the conflict, emphasizing its threats and internal repression.

They insist dismantling the regime prevents further bloodshed, despite acknowledging war's risks.

Internal tensions: Khamenei's leadership faces challenges from potential internal rifts amid internet shutdowns and restricted news access.

Cryptic statements from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps suggest discord, possibly involving former officials like Hassan Rouhani.

The bottom line: Iranian dissidents express concern over the regime's maneuvers and urge international attention to its internal pressures and external deflection tactics.

They stress the need for a clear understanding of the regime's strategies and potential threats to its own people.

To read the full article, click here.

Yes, Reza Pahlavi Must Overhaul His Organization and Move to the Region

On June 22, President Donald Trump all but endorsed regime change in Iran in a social media post. This is wise. Regime change is different than regime collapse. Iran should not become a failed state, but rather a country that realigns with the free world. Ideally, Iran would become a liberal democratic state. Any talk of regime change in Iran necessarily must consider Reza Pahlavi, the crown prince, as a candidate for at least the transition period.

Why it matters: With the Iranian regime at its most vulnerable, Pahlavi's leadership is pivotal. He must act decisively to align Iran with the free world and establish a liberal democracy.

His collaboration with U.S. and Israeli allies positions him uniquely to facilitate regime change.

The problem with Pahlavi is that Iranians can neither do with nor without him.

Immediate actions: Pahlavi must assert control over his organization and expand his support base to ensure effective leadership.

Pahlavi has failed to expand his support base because his followers do not listen to his message of unity and liberalism. They attack rather than convince.

The time for passive strategy is over; he must enforce unity and discipline among his followers.

Strategic relocation: Moving to a place like Dubai would symbolize his commitment to a modern, secular Iran. Dubai resembles the future the secular youth wish to see: cosmopolitan, modern, and wealthy.

He must engage directly with the U.S. and Israel to counter the regime's suppressive tactics and solidify his role in the transition.

The bottom line: Pahlavi, no young man, has been waiting for this moment his whole adult life, but it is unclear whether he has prepared himself for it. Iranians deserve a capable opposition leader. This is Pahlavi’s chance to prove that he is that man. If not, it is time to disappear from politics and allow someone else to emerge.

To read the full article, click here.

Busting Iran’s Nuclear Gambit, Trump Breaks New Ground for U.S. Power in Region

The U.S. bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities marks a pivotal turning point, fulfilling Tehran's worst nightmares.

Why it matters: Iran's ambitions following the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) have backfired, leading to severe consequences.

Tehran's use of freed sanctions money to expand its proxy network in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon has now resulted in its vulnerability and isolation.

The JCPOA allowed Iran to build up military capabilities on Israel's borders, a strategy that has now unraveled.

Iran's strategic missteps: The October 7, 2023, assault on Israel by its proxy, Hamas, triggered a series of events leading to Iran’s current predicament.

Iran underestimated the U.S. and Israel's resolve, leading eventually to decisive strikes on its nuclear infrastructure.

Tehran's confidence in diplomatic negotiations and strategic maneuvers has now led to significant setbacks.

Consequences and cooperation: The unprecedented U.S.-Israel cooperation highlights a unified front against Iran's nuclear threat.

These joint operations enhance U.S. influence in the Middle East, at the expense of great power rivals like Russia and China.

When America’s ally Israel, using U.S. weapons systems, hammers Russia’s defense partner Iran, siding with Washington looks that much more attractive.

The bottom line: Iran faces limited options, with its nuclear facilities damaged and its regional influence compromised.

Tehran must now navigate heightened international pressure and potential regime destabilization.

The regime's strategic miscalculations have left it isolated amid escalating geopolitical tensions.

To read the full article at the Times of Israel, click here.

Coming Full Circle: The Global Implications of Israel’s Success in Iran

Israel’s operations against Iran since June 13 have stunned military and strategic experts all over the world. And that will bear long-term consequences, beyond the short-term outcome.

Why it matters: America is now fully convinced that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) is the only army, outside its own, that has achieved a complete operational fusion of firepower, advanced technology, information (both human and non-human), and combat preparedness; and they suspect it to be superior in terms of strategic vista and morale.

This bolsters U.S.-Israel cooperation and counters isolationist calls to end American military aid.

Vice President JD Vance has labeled Israel's defense tech a "vital national interest."

Global ripples: Europe realizes the need to bolster its defense capabilities, viewing the IDF as a model.

Russia must reconsider its geopolitical ties after its Iranian ally's setbacks, while India deepens its relationship with Israel.

China's reliance on Iran faces scrutiny, potentially altering its Middle Eastern strategy.

Regional reactions: Middle Eastern states reassess their alliances amid shifting power dynamics.

Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, once skeptical, confront the reality of Israel's military prowess.

The fall of Assad’s regime and the disintegration of Syria further elevate Israel’s strategic position.

The bottom line: October 7 seemed initially to confirm that Israel was not working properly anymore. The subsequent counterattacks, and the fact that the IDF was able to fight on several fronts simultaneously, quickly changed the equation. Then, the decapitation of Hezbollah, the raids against the Houthis or inside Iran, and the induced disintegration of Syria improved Israel’s image even further.

To read the full article, click here.

We hope you’re enjoying our special coverage of the war. Our production of the Dispatch will continue apacewhile the war rages. If you found this useful to understanding the conflict, please forward it to a friend. And please use the comments section to let us know your opinion.

Thank you,

Winfield Myers
Managing Editor, Middle East Forum
Director, Campus Watch

Was this edition useful?

Your email will be recorded and shared with the sender

Powered by