TEHRAN – The end of the twelve-day war between Iran and Israel brought about a fragile calm across the region, yet beneath the silence lies another reality. What has been described as a “ceasefire” is, in truth, not the end of a confrontation but the beginning of a new, multifaceted struggle.

In international politics, a ceasefire often occurs when one side needs time to recover and reposition. This time, it seems that Israel and its Western allies are the ones who need that time more than Iran.

Recent Israeli conflicts in West Asia – from Lebanon to Gaza – have shown that ceasefires rarely signal genuine peace. They are usually pauses in a cycle of confrontation. Cannons may fall silent, but the battles continue on other fronts: in media, in economics, in international organizations, and in the realm of psychological warfare.

Iran now stands at the heart of such a transition. The military war has ended, but pressures persist in new forms –economic threats, targeted sanctions, and narrative warfare in global public opinion.

What Iranians should expect 

The twelve-day conflict demonstrated that Iran’s military deterrence has reached a level that even its adversaries cannot ignore. Yet lasting power is not built solely through military might.

Today's national power rests on three interconnected pillars: intelligent security, a sustainable economy, and social cohesion. A weakening of any of these elements destabilizes the entire structure of power. 

Effective defense, defined as intelligent security, extends beyond the military domain, encompassing cyber defense, intelligence, and early-warning systems that complement hard deterrence. The war underscored the importance of a sustainable economic power and economic independence, necessitating a policy shift toward export-oriented production, reduced dependency on vital imports, and stronger domestic investment. Finally, power endures only when it carries social legitimacy, making the rebuilding of public trust through transparency, justice, and civic participation an essential component of reconstructing power, also known as social authority.

In Washington and Tel Aviv’s calculus, military confrontation is merely one instrument within a broader strategy of pressure.

Analyses emerging from Western think tanks following the twelve-day war reveal that the ceasefire is seen as a chance to recalibrate and tighten these pressures.

From reactivating the “snapback” mechanism at the UN Security Council to reviving regional anti-Iran coalitions, the goal is to contain Iran’s recovery from within.

At the same time, media campaigns, legal maneuvers in international forums, and psychological operations are being deployed to reshape perceptions about Iran—both domestically and abroad.

Trusting in the West’s proclaimed peace intentions would therefore be a strategic miscalculation.

History shows that, in the logic of hegemonic powers, “peace” is merely a temporary name for a renewed offensive. From Iraq to Syria, from Libya to Lebanon, each ceasefire has simply changed the form of the struggle, not its essence.

The reconstruction test

Iran now faces the challenge (and the opportunity) of comprehensive reconstruction. While the twelve-day war tested the country’s military deterrence, the post-war era will test its economic resilience and social cohesion.

In the aftermath of conflict, the economy becomes the decisive front, serving as the second pillar of deterrence. Real deterrence exists only when a nation can withstand economic pressure while maintaining growth. To achieve this, Iran must transform its economic approach from reactive to proactive, which includes reforming the taxation system and reducing tax evasion, supporting knowledge-based industries and export-oriented production, and facilitating domestic investment while expanding regional trade partnerships. Intelligent engagement with emerging blocs such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization will further diversify Iran’s economic relations and reduce reliance on Western markets. Ultimately, power reconstruction without economic reconstruction is merely a façade of strength.

Beyond economics, the media front represents another crucial battle of narratives. In the age of communication, wars are fought as much through narratives as through weapons. Iran’s adversaries have sought to distort perceptions—both of the recent conflict and of Iran’s domestic reality—through global media campaigns. Countering this requires an active, multi-layered media strategy involving intelligent storytelling of national achievements, a strategic presence in international media across multiple languages, and training a new generation of journalists and analysts with both national and global perspectives. Victory in the media arena will not come from mere rebuttals but from Iran’s ability to set the agenda—to define the terms of the global conversation rather than reacting to them.

Furthermore, Tehran now has the chance to institutionalize a new concept in its foreign policy: active peace. This does not mean passivity, but rather represents a balance between military preparedness and diplomatic innovation. Under this approach, Iran must demonstrate that it can produce security without aggression and play a constructive role in regional stability without compromising its independence.

Key directions for this strategy include strengthening regional cooperation frameworks across West Asia, expanding relations with the Global South through BRICS and the SCO, advancing indigenous technologies in energy, cyber defense, and AI, and taking part in regional dialogues on Persian Gulf security and economic integration. This shift would move Iran from a defensive posture to a position of initiative — a transition that the U.S.-centric order finds deeply unsettling.

From survival to strategic progress, the twelve-day conflict proved Iran’s capacity to resist; the next stage is about advancing and shaping Iran’s role in the emerging regional order. As global power centers realign and Western legitimacy erodes, Iran has the opportunity to position itself as a pillar of regional stability, provided it pairs reconstruction with meaningful internal reform.

Sustainable power for Iran will depend on three interwoven dimensions: internal legitimacy, strategic independence, and global influence. If these dimensions are developed together, Iran can evolve from a predominantly resistant actor into a decisive shaper of regional dynamics.

We have already entered the new stage of war 

The twelve-day ceasefire was not the end of war but the beginning of a new chapter in Iran’s modern history, in which battlefields have shifted from geography to perception, from borders to markets, and from missiles to meaning. In this new era, every economic, cultural, and media decision matters as much as any military maneuver.

The United States and Israel may have gone quiet, but their designs continue. Iran’s task is to transform this moment of pause into a platform for renewal — of its economy, its legitimacy, and its strategic vision. True peace will come only when adversaries recognize that war is no longer profitable, and that recognition will arise not from compromise but from the enduring strength of a nation confident in its independence and people.