US and Iran Keep Escalation Limited, Says Army War College Analyst
Research professor Jacob Stoil of the U.S. Army War College says the recent US-Iran strikes remain calibrated, noting the absence of broader attacks as a key indicator of restraint.
Washington and Tehran have exchanged a series of limited strikes and retaliations, prompting concerns about a wider regional conflict. Jacob Stoil, a research professor of Middle East security studies at the U.S. Army War College, told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty that the most telling aspect of the current escalation is what has not occurred.
Stoil said the latest U.S. attacks were a direct response to an Iranian surprise strike on U.S. facilities, but both sides kept their operations narrowly focused. "The US does not appear to have expanded the campaign toward bringing down the regime, and Iran did not initially strike every US ally in the region," he noted, adding that no direct Iranian attacks on Israel have been reported.
Both nations possess the capacity to broaden the conflict, yet neither has employed their full military capabilities. Stoil highlighted Iran's historical ability to hit multiple regional targets through proxies such as the Houthis, Hezbollah and Hamas, but observed that Tehran is currently refraining from a larger offensive, suggesting a lack of interest in expanding the war.
Regarding Iran's tactics, Stoil explained that the country has long prioritized missile and drone forces, irregular units and information operations over conventional ground and air forces, which have been weakened by previous U.S. and Israeli strikes. He said Iran's conventional navy is largely destroyed, limiting its ability to conduct large-scale ground maneuvers.
In the maritime domain, Iran seeks to leverage its capacity to disrupt traffic through the Strait of Hormuz as a bargaining tool. Stoil described recent attacks on neighboring states, U.S. forces and commercial shipping as attempts to normalize such pressure as a permanent feature of regional dynamics.
Information warfare, according to Stoil, is central to Iran's strategy. By spreading misinformation and raising the political and economic costs of continued conflict for the United States, Tehran aims to erode U.S. public support and compel diplomatic concessions.
Stoil advised analysts to watch for signs that violence is being used as a negotiating language. He said each side’s limited strikes convey messages about red lines and tolerances, and that the interplay of kinetic actions, information campaigns and diplomatic channels will determine whether the situation moves toward broader war or renewed negotiations.