The Iran-Israel Flashpoint: Strategic Realities, Sleeper Threats, and China’s Opportunism

This blog is adapted from a strategic brief originally provided to the U.S. State Department and U.S. Central Command prior to the U.S. strike on Iran. While the original brief contained classified or sensitive operational context that cannot be shared publicly, this version reflects the unclassified analysis, strategic foresight, and predictive assessments that informed the original. It has been revised for a broader audience, preserving the core insights while respecting necessary limitations on content disclosure. The ongoing unrest inside Iran, combined with renewed regional tensions, makes this analysis especially relevant as policymakers and observers seek to understand what may come next.

As the world watches the volatile dynamics between Iran and Israel unfold in real time, a deeper analysis is required, one that examines not only the tactical events and public headlines but the underlying strategic calculus, the choices not made, and the implications for regional actors, great power competitors, and the Iranian people themselves. This blog seeks to provide a holistic and predictive look at the current Iran-Israel crisis, incorporating historical patterns, operational decisions, and the broader geopolitical landscape of 2025.

A Recap of the Road to Escalation

The simmering hostilities between Israel and Iran have spanned decades, but 2025 has marked an inflection point. What began as tit-for-tat proxy strikes and cyber-attacks has escalated into more direct confrontation. The Iranian drone attack on Israeli infrastructure earlier this year, combined with cyber disruptions to Israeli water and electrical systems, pushed Israel to act decisively. The latest escalation was moving missiles to the launch pads days before the June 15 negotiation between Iran and the United States in Oman. Although this might have been an Iranian bargaining position going into the meeting, it was taken as threatening when considered alongside recent Iranian threats to Israel and the increase in highly enriched centrifuges during the ongoing negotiations. In response, Israel launched a coordinated air and missile campaign targeting Iran’s IRGC Quds Force infrastructure, nuclear facilities, and weapons development centers across Isfahan, Natanz, and elsewhere.

What followed was a wave of global concern: would this spark a regional war? Would the Strait of Hormuz be mined? Would Hezbollah unleash its arsenal in solidarity with Iran? And would the United States intervene?

Why Iran Didn’t Mine the Strait of Hormuz

The Strait of Hormuz has long been one of the most obvious flashpoints in any Iran-related conflict. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow maritime chokepoint through which nearly 20% of the world’s oil flows; closing it would have catastrophic economic consequences. Yet Iran refrained from doing so, and that decision was not born of hesitation but calculation.

The key reason: China.

China is now Iran’s most important strategic partner, especially since sanctions have driven Tehran to the East. Iran’s $400 billion 25-year agreement with China, its entrance into the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, and China’s continued import of Iranian oil have changed Iran’s calculus. Mining the Strait would not only cripple the global economy but would deliver a blow to Beijing’s energy security and its Belt and Road logistics.

For a regime fighting to survive and gain legitimacy in the face of internal unrest, alienating its last major patron is unthinkable.

Hezbollah’s Silence

Decapitated and Disillusioned Hezbollah, traditionally viewed as Iran’s most loyal proxy and “second-strike” option, surprised many by remaining on the sidelines in this recent escalation. But this silence speaks volumes.

There are two core reasons:

1. Strategic Decapitation: Over the past 18 months, Israel’s precision targeting of Hezbollah’s leadership in southern Lebanon and Damascus has significantly degraded its command structure. The death of key planners and financiers, coupled with disruptions to weapons smuggling routes from Syria, has forced Hezbollah into a defensive posture. With internal cohesion shaken and its upper echelons exposed, Hezbollah is simply not in a position to escalate without risking its survival.

2. Loss of Faith in Tehran: Hezbollah has fought multiple wars at Iran’s behest, most notably in 2006, and more recently during the 2021 border skirmishes and in support of Syria’s Assad regime. Yet, when Israel struck deep into southern Lebanon, Iran offered rhetorical support but no direct military assistance. Many in Hezbollah’s ranks now view Tehran as a “paper tiger,” willing to provoke but unwilling to bleed.

This erosion of loyalty has created a dangerous vacuum. Israel’s success in dividing the Axis of Resistance may be one of the most consequential strategic developments of this conflict.

Influence Operations and Growing Civil Resistance 

Amid these escalating tensions, Israel has reportedly initiated covert support for anti-regime forces within Iran. According to regional sources, Israeli intelligence has met with dissident networks and former Iranian officers now operating in exile. These connections have enabled new influence operations, including hijacking state-run TV channels.

In recent weeks, Iranian citizens have watched as their state-controlled broadcasts were interrupted by messages of hope, protest footage, and chants of “Zan, Zendegi, Azadi” (Woman, Life, Freedom). These messages aim not just to inspire, but to psychologically fracture the regime’s monopoly on truth.

Yet, the situation is fragile. Iranian women have increasingly defied the state by removing the hijab in public. Mass protests have erupted in Tehran, Isfahan, and Mashhad. But the threat of regime retaliation looms large. If regime change does not materialize, these brave acts may be met with mass arrests, torture, or worse.

There are ongoing quiet discussions both internal and external aimed at persuading elements of the Iranian military to stand down in the event of a civilian uprising. So far, these conversations are inconclusive. The IRGC remains loyal to the Supreme Leader, but signs of dissent exist within the broader military.

Sleeper Cells on Standby: A Hidden Threat

A final but crucial dimension of this crisis is the possible existence of Iranian-sponsored sleeper cells within the United States. Intelligence officials have long warned that Iran’s Quds Force and Hezbollah maintain networks capable of asymmetric action, including cyber-attacks, sabotage, or targeted violence inside the U.S. homeland. While no overt action has been taken by these operatives, their existence is widely believed to be a contingency held in reserve, not for tit-for-tat retaliation, but for existential regime defense.

If Iran perceives that its regime is on the brink of collapse, particularly under external military pressure or a coordinated internal uprising, it may activate these operatives to deter U.S. involvement or exact a psychological cost. For now, the regime understands that triggering such attacks would invite overwhelming American retaliation. But this threat underscores the need for robust counterintelligence, domestic vigilance, and interagency coordination.

Regime Change in Iran: The People Are Ready, But the Means Are Missing

Beneath the geopolitical headlines lies another important reality: the Iranian people are restive. From the Mahsa Amini protests in 2022 to ongoing anti-regime demonstrations in 2025, the Iranian public has shown courage and a desire for change. The regime is increasingly viewed as corrupt, isolated, and indifferent to its citizens’ suffering.

Yet despite this discontent, true regime change remains elusive, and not because of a lack of will.

The Iranian people are unarmed, while the IRGC is heavily militarized and ideologically hardened. In the wake of the 2009 Green Movement where an estimated 6 million Iranians protested Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s fraudulent re-election, the Obama administration chose silence. Without external support or internal armament, the protests were brutally crushed.

This is the grim truth - regime change cannot succeed when the people lack the means to resist, and the regime has no hesitation to kill its own citizens.

China’s Opportunistic Calculus: Watch the Other Hand

As the United States repositions air defense, missile defense, and naval assets from the Indo-Pacific to the Middle East in preparation for contingencies involving Iran, a new and dangerous strategic window opens. China may see this shift not merely as a moment of distraction, but as a calculated opportunity to advance its own objectives against Taiwan.

Chinese military doctrine places heavy emphasis on exploiting adversary distraction and overextension. With key U.S. assets temporarily out of position, Beijing may increase naval patrols, ramp up gray-zone operations around Taiwan, or test the resolve of regional allies through cyber pressure, air incursions, or proxy provocations.

This dynamic is akin to a magician’s misdirection. While global attention focuses on the Middle East, the real maneuver may come in the Pacific. U.S. intelligence and Indo-Pacific Command must remain vigilant, actively scanning for strategic indicators and pre-invasion logistics preparations. Failure to do so could allow China to erode regional deterrence or even attempt a fait accompli against Taiwan before forces can be realigned.

This is the burden of a global power, to act decisively in one theater without forfeiting deterrence in another.

Final Thoughts and Predictions

It is always difficult to write during conflict. Events change quickly, and narratives are still forming. But strategic clarity is needed now more than ever.

Iran’s restraint in mining the Strait, Hezbollah’s silence, and the Iranian people’s defiance all tell us one thing: this is not a war of inevitability. It is a contest of will, narrative, and power.

My prediction: unless Iran crosses another red line, such as fast-tracking nuclear enrichment or striking U.S. assets, the conflict will simmer, not explode. But if the United States fails to show resolve, we will see a rise in Iranian proxy activity, further repression of domestic dissent, and a deepening of China’s influence in the region. As I outlined in my earlier analysis, Preemptive Strike: Why the U.S. Must Act Against Iran’s Nuclear Program, strategic inaction may carry greater long-term risks than timely intervention.

This is the moment for strategic decisiveness, not just to shape the Middle East, but to define what America stands for in the 21st century.

This analysis delivers forward-looking insight into the strategic forces shaping the Middle East and beyond. From Iran’s internal fragility to China’s opportunistic maneuvering, the implications extend across multiple theaters of competition. If your agency or command needs clear-eyed intelligence, predictive assessments, or strategic advisory support grounded in real-world expertise, i3CA stands ready to help. Reach out to me at tony.thacker@i3solutions.com to discuss how our team can deliver targeted threat forecasts, scenario-based decision briefs, and mission-critical strategic counsel to support national security initiatives.