TEHRAN - Jianwei Han, an associate professor at the Middle East Studies Institute of Shanghai International Studies University, believes Iran has shown extraordinary resilience against U.S. military pressure, and that the current confrontation marks a watershed moment reshaping the Middle East's strategic landscape.

In an interview with the Tehran Times, she discusses the widening gap between U.S. and Israeli objectives, the sustainability of (Persian) Gulf states' neutrality, the economic fallout from the Strait of Hormuz blockade, and the prospects and limits of China-Iran cooperation under sanctions.

The following is the full text of the interview:

American officials argued that military pressure would weaken Iran. Based on recent developments, has that strategy worked, or has Iran proved more resilient than expected?

I don't think the U.S. assessment is correct. I believe Iran has demonstrated extraordinary resilience in its war against the United States, evident in various aspects such as government operations, wartime organization and mobilization, and public opinion guidance and propaganda, etc.

Do you consider the latest escalation merely another episode in the decades-long U.S.-Iran confrontation, or has it crossed a threshold that fundamentally changes the strategic landscape of the Middle East?

I believe that the recent confrontation between the US and Iran is not merely an episode; it has escalated to a new stage, and the impact on the geopolitical and security landscape of the Middle East is also profound. This war may be a significant watershed for the US influence in the Middle East, and the relationships among regional countries may undergo a remarkable reorganization and reconfiguration.

Only weeks before military operations resumed, diplomatic channels still appeared to be open. Looking back, do you think diplomacy genuinely failed, or was military escalation becoming the preferred option for one or more of the parties involved?

I believe neither the US nor Iran has the intention to launch a full-scale war. However, there is a profound trust deficit between the two sides, making them extremely difficult to reach a truly feasible agreement. This also makes the negotiation merely a means for the two sides to temporarily cease hostilities rather than the ultimate goal. But I think at some point in the future, the two sides will still have to sit down and negotiate. Continuing the war does not serve the interests of either side.

Beyond its impact on oil markets, how would instability on the Strait of Hormuz reshape regional security, global shipping, and the calculations of outside powers?

The long-term blockade of the Strait of Hormuz has had a direct impact on regional security and international shipping. Not only oil, but also fertilizers and some key raw materials cannot be transported normally, causing a severe impact on the global supply chain. At the same time, alternative supply chains around the world are emerging, especially the land routes are accelerating their construction. Although the cost is high, they remain an important alternative solution to deal with the blockade and uncertainties. The blockade may prompt countries outside the region to become more actively involved in mediating the US-Iran conflict. In any case, ending this conflict is truly in the interests of the vast majority of countries.

The Persian Gulf states have attempted to avoid being drawn directly into the conflict despite hosting American military facilities. How sustainable is this balancing strategy if the confrontation continues to intensify?

The (Persian) Gulf Arab countries generally hope to remain neutral in the US-Iran war. However, due to attacks from Iranian missiles and drones, their relations with Iran have also become tense. These countries are not willing to fully follow the US and engage in military confrontation with Iran. But the positions of different countries may vary. Some countries will be more inclined to be tough on Iran, while others will be more moderate. This depends on their own national strength and the closeness of their relations with the US or Israel. I think if Iran does not attack the civilian facilities of these countries in the future, these countries will basically still maintain a neutral stance.

To what extent do you believe Israel's security calculations have influenced the current trajectory of U.S. policy toward Iran? 
The strategic goals of the United States and Israel in the Middle East are not entirely aligned. The United States actually intends to gradually withdraw from the Middle East  and does not want to invest too many resources. However, it also wants to maintain its hegemony in the Middle East through Israel. Israel regards Iran as the greatest threat to its own security and has thus drawn the United States into this war that was originally thought to be winnable quickly. Now the US government has realized that getting embroiled in a long-term war with Iran is not beneficial and is eager to extricate itself and end the war. However, Israel still hopes to fight against Iran to the end and does not want the US to quit. This is the biggest difference between the two sides at present.

Reports indicate that bridges, ports, energy facilities, and other civilian infrastructure have suffered damage during the latest attacks. Beyond the immediate humanitarian consequences, what long-term economic and political effects could this have on Iran and the wider region?

If the war continues to expand, Iran will suffer greater material and economic losses as well as more casualties, exacerbating the domestic shortages of resources, currency depreciation and inflation crisis. This will lead to a serious humanitarian crisis and possibly trigger a severe humanitarian disaster. The war will also cause great psychological trauma to the people. Similarly, neighboring countries will continue to bear the consequences of the spillover effects of the US-Iran war. The infrastructure of the (Persian) Gulf Arab countries will be severely damaged, thereby affecting the economic growth rate, people's lives and investment security of these countries.

Could the latest U.S. attacks accelerate economic, technological, and defense cooperation between Tehran and Beijing?

The US sanctions will bring more challenges to the economic and trade cooperation between China and Iran in the short term. Currently, many Chinese enterprises are unable to operate normally in Iran due to sanctions. The high-tech cooperation between China and Iran is also facing more difficulties. As for the defense cooperation between China and Iran, the challenges may be even greater. China understands and respects Iran's position of safeguarding its national and ethnic interests. However, it also calls on both sides to sit at the negotiation table to solve the problems. China has stated that it will provide assistance and convenience for the negotiations and communication between the two sides.