Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi stated that the recent bombing campaign against Tehran caused no meaningful damage to Iran’s ability to continue military operations against Israel and the United States.
According to him, the country remains operational because of its decentralised “mosaic defence strategy,” which was designed to prevent collapse even after leadership losses.
His remarks were published on X while the regional conflict continues to escalate following the 28 February strikes carried out by the United States and Israel. Reports from the Israel Defense Forces and statements from Donald Trump indicated that the attacks killed dozens of senior Iranian officials, including the country’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Since then, the confrontation has spread beyond Iran and Israel, affecting the wider Middle East region. Iran has launched retaliatory strikes against Israeli targets and US-aligned Gulf nations, while Lebanon has become involved due to support from Hezbollah.
Understanding Iran’s Mosaic Defence Strategy
Iran’s mosaic defence doctrine is built on the idea that the country should never rely on a single central command.
Instead, authority is divided among many independent regional units so that even if top leaders are eliminated, the military can continue operating.
Experts trace the origin of this concept to the early 2000s, shortly after the United States invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. Analysts observed that the rapid fall of Saddam Hussein’s government happened partly because US forces quickly destroyed the leadership chain.
During the leadership of Muhammad Ali Jafari, who commanded Iran’s Revolutionary Guard from 2007 to 2019, the system became more structured and deeply integrated into the country’s defence planning.
Under this strategy, each province functions as a separate defensive unit with its own commanders, supply reserves, and local production capability.
Iran has 31 provinces, and each one can operate with a high level of autonomy if the national command structure is damaged.
This model is meant to allow Iran to survive both airstrikes and a possible ground invasion.
How Sanctions Shaped Iran’s Military Structure
For more than four decades, Iran has been under heavy Western sanctions linked to its nuclear programme, regional proxy support, and human-rights concerns.
Because of this isolation, the country has been forced to rely heavily on domestic production of weapons, drones, and military equipment.
Instead of concentrating factories in a few locations, Iran distributed manufacturing sites across multiple provinces.
Warehouses, storage facilities, and drone workshops are scattered across the country to reduce the risk of total destruction during attacks.
Military analysts say this arrangement also supports Iran’s long-term strategy of prolonging conflicts, since extended wars can create political pressure on Western governments.
Iran’s Response After US-Israeli Airstrikes
The United States announced that its main objectives were to eliminate Iran’s missile and nuclear capabilities, weaken naval forces, and stop regional proxy groups from threatening American troops in the Middle East.
Israel issued similar statements, saying the operation aimed to remove threats linked to Iran’s missile programme and allied militant networks.
Even after losing senior leaders, Iran managed to launch retaliatory strikes against Israel and several Gulf states.
Targets included oil facilities, airports, and military bases in countries aligned with the United States.
These actions suggest that the decentralised command system allowed Iran to continue operating despite heavy losses.
However, officials from Iran’s diplomatic mission at the United Nations avoided directly confirming that the bombings had no effect.
Instead, they focused on civilian casualties, including reports of a school bombing that killed more than 170 people.
Has the Conflict Reduced Iran’s Military Capabilities?
Since the start of the war, US and Israeli forces have attacked naval bases, missile storage sites, and launch platforms across Iran.
Thousands of missiles and drones were fired during the first days of the conflict, but later reports indicated a sharp decrease in launches.
According to US officials, ballistic missile activity dropped by more than 80% compared to the initial phase of the war.
Military analysts believe this decline may be caused by:
- Destruction of launchers
- Loss of storage facilities
- Operational limits due to air superiority
- Difficulty moving equipment under constant surveillance
Israeli estimates claim that a large percentage of Iran’s missile launch systems have been destroyed, although officials also warn that Iran may still have hidden stockpiles in underground bunkers often called “missile cities.”
Because these facilities are built deep underground, it is still unclear how much damage has actually been done.
Drones remain one of Iran’s strongest tools, since they are cheaper to produce and harder to stop.
Recent attacks in the Gulf region showed that even small drones can cause serious economic damage.
Civilian Impact and Humanitarian Consequences
The war has also caused major civilian casualties.
Iranian officials reported more than a thousand civilian deaths and many thousands injured since the strikes began.
Healthcare infrastructure has also been damaged, with hospitals, ambulances, and emergency centers hit during the conflict.
The World Health Organization confirmed several attacks affecting medical facilities.
Large numbers of people have fled major cities, especially Tehran, moving to northern regions and rural areas to escape the fighting.
The United Nations refugee agency estimates that millions of people may have been displaced.
Propaganda, Messaging, and Psychological Warfare
Military experts say that statements claiming the strikes had “no impact” may also be part of wartime messaging.
Publicly emphasizing the strength of the mosaic defence system helps reassure the Iranian population that the government remains in control.
At the same time, such statements send a signal to foreign opponents that removing leaders will not quickly end the conflict.
This kind of communication is common during wars, where information is often used as a strategic tool alongside weapons.
Even though Iran’s decentralized system allows continued resistance, current data suggests that the strikes have caused significant but not total damage to its military capacity.
Kindly Share:
Discover more from LMSINT STORE
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
