The Iranian Hypothesis: Power, Humiliation, and Delegitimization

The Iranian Hypothesis: Power, Humiliation, and Delegitimization

Di Paolo Falconio 

Within the broader framework of U.S. power projection, Iran stands out as a distinct case compared to other theatres. Here, any potential American intervention would not have regime change as its immediate objective, nor a classic military victory.  

Its function would be different: to deepen the regime’s humiliation.

According to the perception within Israeli‑American security circles, the domestic protests stem not only from economic collapse but above all from the erosion of the theocracy’s prestige—now seen as unable to defend itself and therefore unworthy of governing. The humiliation suffered during the twelve‑day war is believed to have fractured the symbolic pact between the regime and society.

In this logic, a limited military action would carry psychological and symbolic weight rather than traditional strategic value: pushing the regime to turn inward, thereby accelerating an already ongoing process of delegitimization. Even the Mossad’s public claim of playing an active role in the unrest is not mere propaganda but a signal: the conflict with Tehran is now being fought primarily on the terrain of symbolic delegitimization, before the military one.

Not projection to conquer, but pressure to erode.  

Not the immediate consolidation of results, but the triggering of an irreversible internal dynamic.  

A strategy that speaks less of war and more of power.