Washington has shifted its approach toward Iran, moving to a new pressure model often described as the “anaconda strategy.” This assessment was offered by Iran expert Armen Vardanyan, who analyzed recent US actions and statements.
According to him, the United States previously relied on direct military pressure, including missile strikes and air operations, to force Iran into negotiations. However, this approach did not achieve its objectives. Despite significant damage to infrastructure and leadership losses, Iran maintained its state stability and governance capacity.
Iran’s resilience and US costs
Vardanyan notes that Iran demonstrated strong resilience, managing to sustain its system even under prolonged pressure.
At the same time, the US incurred considerable costs. Military operations required substantial financial resources and resulted in equipment losses.
He also points to attacks on US bases in the Middle East, where advanced radar systems were destroyed and aircraft were damaged.
Shift to a long-term strategy
Following these developments, the US leadership adjusted its strategy toward a longer-term model of pressure.
This approach focuses on gradual containment, aiming to restrict Iran’s capabilities without direct military confrontation.
Economic pressure and oil exports
A central element of this strategy is economic pressure, particularly targeting Iran’s oil sector.
Since oil exports form a major share of Iran’s revenue, the US is focusing on influencing the supply chain, including transportation routes and logistics.
According to Vardanyan, limiting these flows has become a key mechanism of pressure.
Reducing risks
The expert concludes that this strategy is less costly and less risky for Washington, as it reduces direct military engagement while maintaining sustained pressure on Iran.