US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu believed military pressure on Iran would quickly reshape the Middle East, but developments on the ground suggest a far more prolonged and unstable outcome.

According to analysis, the conflict has not led to the swift strategic shift both leaders expected, with Iran remaining operational and continuing to demonstrate the ability to strike back despite sustained military pressure.

The report highlights that Iran’s leadership views survival and deterrence as its primary objectives, including maintaining influence over key strategic routes such as the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global shipping lane.

Recent escalations, including the downing of a US Apache helicopter, are seen as evidence that Tehran retains the capacity to respond to US and Israeli actions, complicating diplomatic efforts aimed at de-escalation.

The analysis says Washington is attempting to balance military responses with ongoing, though limited, diplomatic engagement, with the US administration still seeking a potential agreement that could address Iran’s nuclear programme and regional activity.

It adds that Israel and the United States initially assumed that combined military pressure and regional setbacks for Iran’s allies would weaken Tehran’s position, but instead the conflict has evolved into a longer and more unstable confrontation.

The Strait of Hormuz, once one of the world’s busiest shipping routes, has been severely disrupted since the escalation of hostilities, raising concerns over prolonged economic and energy market impacts.

Iran, meanwhile, is said to view continued pressure as justification to strengthen its deterrence strategy, linking conflicts across Lebanon and the Gulf region as part of a broader regional posture.

Analysts suggest that instead of a rapid political shift, the region is now facing a drawn-out period of instability, with periodic flare-ups and no clear path to a comprehensive settlement.