Operation Roaring Lion

More than two months after the outbreak of Operation “Roaring Lion," the Islamic Republic stands with significant vulnerabilities and a new leadership, yet it also has certain achievements to its credit. These include surviving a joint American-Israeli attack and exploiting levers of pressure created during the fighting, including attacks against the Gulf states and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. While it is premature to assess the full implications of the war, the conclusion of which remains uncertain, prominent trajectories can already be identified across six key domains: the Iranian domestic arena; the nuclear program; the missile array; the regional proxy network; Iran’s standing in the regional order; and Iran’s position in the global arena. Insights in these contexts are intended to serve as a foundation for analyzing subsequent developments in the coming months, once the "dust of war" settles and its long-term implications become evident. At present, the current status quo ("neither war nor peace"), characterized by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz alongside an American naval blockade, remains unstable. It is doubtful whether such a state can be sustained over time. For Israel, this reality implies that Iran continues to maintain its nuclear capabilities while rehabilitating its missile array. This increases the risk of a "breakout" toward nuclear weapons and the resumption of hostilities under more difficult conditions. Against this backdrop, Israel faces a fundamental question: Should it continue to strive for a resolution to the Iranian problem through a decisive victory—the achievability of which is highly questionable, particularly without active U.S. participation? Or should it adopt a policy of "conflict management" through intermittent enforcement, until a political shift occurs within Iran?

How did European nations navigate the geopolitical test posed by the American-Israeli war against Iran, and what lessons should Israel draw?

How has the war in Iran reshaped the security and strategic considerations of the Gulf states?

Assuming that Operation Roaring Lion does not end in the complete defeat of Hezbollah, the issue of disarming Hezbollah will remain on the agenda at its conclusion—an interest shared by both Israel and the Lebanese state. This article proposes adopting the DDR model—Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration—and advancing an L(ebanon)DDR process as an orderly framework for disarming Hezbollah and integrating it into Lebanon, alongside repairing, rebuilding, and strengthening the Lebanese state. This framework offers an alternative to disarming Hezbollah through military force, which would require Israel to occupy all of Lebanon. Although it is clear that Hezbollah will not relinquish its weapons easily, the current circumstances present an opportunity to force this outcome through combined Lebanese–Israeli, regional, and international efforts. These circumstances include the willingness of Israel and Lebanon to enter into direct political negotiations; the military weakening of Hezbollah (and Iran) following the war; the IDF’s presence in southern Lebanon; and the growing support within Lebanon for disarming Hezbollah. On April 9, Israel agreed to President Aoun’s proposal to open direct negotiations with Lebanon to promote a peace arrangement and disarm Hezbollah. This objective is the central challenge on the path to an agreement between the two states, which would establish the Lebanese government’s monopoly over the use of military force. Experience from DDR processes suggests that this model can help, as it offers a long-term, supervised, and gradual process that combines disarmament with civil, social, and economic rehabilitation, alongside international support and reciprocal incentives for all parties involved.