The recent speech of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, beyond a casual description of the role of the Basij in the Islamic Republic of Iran, is in fact a comprehensive map of regional security developments and a strategic reinterpretation of the new balance of power in West Asia; a balance that, after the 12-day war, has noticeably changed to the detriment of the United States and the Zionist regime and to the benefit of the axis of resistance. Moreover, the firm rejection of rumors regarding Tehran’s message to Washington about negotiations has a central message for Iran’s regional policy: Tehran is not in a position of weakness, but rather in a moment of strategic confidence and is maintaining its red lines without hesitation.
Publish dateSaturday 29 November 2025 - 16:33
Story Code : 338572
Although at the beginning of his speech, the Leader of the Islamic Revolution emphasized the popular and unique nature of the Basij in Iran and considered it “a phenomenon arising from the context of Iranian society,” the important and strategic part of his speech was related to three issues:
1. Analysis of the results of the 12-Day War and its consequences for the United States and Israel
2. Rereading the current position of Washington and Tel Aviv and reducing their deterrent power
3. Explicitly denying the American narrative about Iran’s message and emphasizing that Tehran will not negotiate under pressure
These three layers together present a picture of confidence in national power, increasing Iran’s strategic depth, and the increasing weakness of regional and trans-regional rivals.
1. Analysis of the 12-Day War; Changing the Regional Balance
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution described the 12-Day War against the Islamic Republic of Iran as an important “cut” in the regional situation; not a normal conflict, not a recurring cycle of constant tensions, but a moment in which a security order collapsed and a new order emerged.
1–1. The collapse of the Zionist regime’s deterrence
In this analysis, several key points stand out:
- Israel, despite its vast military power and unconditional US support, was unable to dominate the field.
- Successive threats to launch ground operations never materialized due to the high potential costs.
- Israel’s multi-layered defenses were eroded at several levels against the volume and precision of the resistance’s fire.
This situation means the end of the Zionist regime’s image of invincibility; an image that seven decades of political and military investment to create has now been seriously damaged by a short war.
1–2. The rise of the resistance to a deterrent actor
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution emphasized that the 12-day war proved that the resistance was no longer a “dispersed force,” but a military actor with the power to respond instantaneously, high precision, and the ability to continue striking.
This point is very important in the media analysis: Tehran effectively showed that the 20-year US strategy to contain and limit the resistance had failed.
1–3. Iran’s role in shaping the new equation
Without directly entering the war, but with structural support for the axis of resistance, Iran showed that:
- Regional equations cannot be regulated without it,
- And Tehran today has a “strategic contribution” to every military and political development.
This message is meaningful not only for the United States and the Zionist regime, but also for America’s regional allies.
2. Analysis of the situation of the United States and Israel after the war
The speech of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution provides an unprecedented picture of the domestic and foreign conditions of the two main anti-Iranian actors – Washington and Tel Aviv.
2–1. America: From strategic initiative to political passivity
In this analysis:
- America is no longer able to restore the regional order it desires.
- Domestic political crises, electoral pressures, and structural gaps have cut Washington’s hand short.
- America’s position has changed from “determining trends” to “reacting to events.”
In such circumstances, Tehran feels that the US has lost the conditions for negotiation or pressure, and Iran is not in a position to demand.
2-2. Israel: Security crisis coupled with legitimacy crisis
In interpreting Imam Khamenei’s words, Israel is in crisis on three levels:
1. Security crisis:
- Inability to advance the war,
- Failure to achieve the declared goals,
- And severe vulnerability to resistance attacks.
2. Domestic crisis:
- Unprecedented political divide,
- Weakening of the Prime Minister’s position,
- And widespread social discontent.
3. International crisis:
- Corrupted legitimacy,
- Declining public support from the West,
- And increasing legal and media pressures.
In this view, Israel has transformed from a deterrent power into a state in need of permanent support.
3. Response to rumors about Iran’s message to the US
The most important part of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution’s speech, from a strategic perspective, was his categorical denial of the words about Iran’s message for negotiations. He called the claim a “lie.”
3–1. Why is this denial important?
Iran’s silence could have made sense to Washington; but:
- The Leader of the Islamic Revolution personally rejected it,
- and practically showed that Tehran does not want to show even the slightest sign of softening under pressure.
- This message directly changes the equation of the nuclear negotiations.
3–2. Negotiations under pressure, Tehran’s red line
With this stance, Tehran announced:
- Iran will not make concessions,
- It will determine the timing of the negotiations itself,
- and no backroom deals are conceivable under the current circumstances.
3–3. Indirect message to the resistance and public opinion
With this stance: The regional allies of the Islamic Republic are assured that Tehran is not seeking secret agreements at the height of the wars. Domestic public opinion also understands that Tehran will not engage in any process that will result in a repetition of past unsuccessful experiences.
Final analytical summary: Iran's new position and the decline of the US-Israel duality
The full outcome of the Iranian leader's remarks draws the following map:
1. The 12-day war was the end of Israeli deterrence and the beginning of a new equation of resistance.
2. It is in the most difficult regional decision-making situation and is engaged in internal challenges.
3. Israel is facing a simultaneous security, political, and legitimacy crisis and is unable to rebuild its deterrence.
4. Iran is at the center of regional developments and has expanded its strategic depth without entering a war.
5. The nuclear issue is no longer a tool for Western pressure; Iran determines the time and framework for negotiations.
6. The rejection of the rumors of the message to the United States showed that Tehran is not ready for any hasty deal and that pressure cannot change Iran's behavior.
7. Finally, Iran today sees itself in a superior position and higher strategic confidence; a position that is based on the real balance of power in the region, not on political agreements.
1. Analysis of the results of the 12-Day War and its consequences for the United States and Israel
2. Rereading the current position of Washington and Tel Aviv and reducing their deterrent power
3. Explicitly denying the American narrative about Iran’s message and emphasizing that Tehran will not negotiate under pressure
These three layers together present a picture of confidence in national power, increasing Iran’s strategic depth, and the increasing weakness of regional and trans-regional rivals.
1. Analysis of the 12-Day War; Changing the Regional Balance
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution described the 12-Day War against the Islamic Republic of Iran as an important “cut” in the regional situation; not a normal conflict, not a recurring cycle of constant tensions, but a moment in which a security order collapsed and a new order emerged.
1–1. The collapse of the Zionist regime’s deterrence
In this analysis, several key points stand out:
- Israel, despite its vast military power and unconditional US support, was unable to dominate the field.
- Successive threats to launch ground operations never materialized due to the high potential costs.
- Israel’s multi-layered defenses were eroded at several levels against the volume and precision of the resistance’s fire.
This situation means the end of the Zionist regime’s image of invincibility; an image that seven decades of political and military investment to create has now been seriously damaged by a short war.
1–2. The rise of the resistance to a deterrent actor
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution emphasized that the 12-day war proved that the resistance was no longer a “dispersed force,” but a military actor with the power to respond instantaneously, high precision, and the ability to continue striking.
This point is very important in the media analysis: Tehran effectively showed that the 20-year US strategy to contain and limit the resistance had failed.
1–3. Iran’s role in shaping the new equation
Without directly entering the war, but with structural support for the axis of resistance, Iran showed that:
- Regional equations cannot be regulated without it,
- And Tehran today has a “strategic contribution” to every military and political development.
This message is meaningful not only for the United States and the Zionist regime, but also for America’s regional allies.
2. Analysis of the situation of the United States and Israel after the war
The speech of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution provides an unprecedented picture of the domestic and foreign conditions of the two main anti-Iranian actors – Washington and Tel Aviv.
2–1. America: From strategic initiative to political passivity
In this analysis:
- America is no longer able to restore the regional order it desires.
- Domestic political crises, electoral pressures, and structural gaps have cut Washington’s hand short.
- America’s position has changed from “determining trends” to “reacting to events.”
In such circumstances, Tehran feels that the US has lost the conditions for negotiation or pressure, and Iran is not in a position to demand.
2-2. Israel: Security crisis coupled with legitimacy crisis
In interpreting Imam Khamenei’s words, Israel is in crisis on three levels:
1. Security crisis:
- Inability to advance the war,
- Failure to achieve the declared goals,
- And severe vulnerability to resistance attacks.
2. Domestic crisis:
- Unprecedented political divide,
- Weakening of the Prime Minister’s position,
- And widespread social discontent.
3. International crisis:
- Corrupted legitimacy,
- Declining public support from the West,
- And increasing legal and media pressures.
In this view, Israel has transformed from a deterrent power into a state in need of permanent support.
3. Response to rumors about Iran’s message to the US
The most important part of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution’s speech, from a strategic perspective, was his categorical denial of the words about Iran’s message for negotiations. He called the claim a “lie.”
3–1. Why is this denial important?
Iran’s silence could have made sense to Washington; but:
- The Leader of the Islamic Revolution personally rejected it,
- and practically showed that Tehran does not want to show even the slightest sign of softening under pressure.
- This message directly changes the equation of the nuclear negotiations.
3–2. Negotiations under pressure, Tehran’s red line
With this stance, Tehran announced:
- Iran will not make concessions,
- It will determine the timing of the negotiations itself,
- and no backroom deals are conceivable under the current circumstances.
3–3. Indirect message to the resistance and public opinion
With this stance: The regional allies of the Islamic Republic are assured that Tehran is not seeking secret agreements at the height of the wars. Domestic public opinion also understands that Tehran will not engage in any process that will result in a repetition of past unsuccessful experiences.
Final analytical summary: Iran's new position and the decline of the US-Israel duality
The full outcome of the Iranian leader's remarks draws the following map:
1. The 12-day war was the end of Israeli deterrence and the beginning of a new equation of resistance.
2. It is in the most difficult regional decision-making situation and is engaged in internal challenges.
3. Israel is facing a simultaneous security, political, and legitimacy crisis and is unable to rebuild its deterrence.
4. Iran is at the center of regional developments and has expanded its strategic depth without entering a war.
5. The nuclear issue is no longer a tool for Western pressure; Iran determines the time and framework for negotiations.
6. The rejection of the rumors of the message to the United States showed that Tehran is not ready for any hasty deal and that pressure cannot change Iran's behavior.
7. Finally, Iran today sees itself in a superior position and higher strategic confidence; a position that is based on the real balance of power in the region, not on political agreements.
avapress.net/vdchq6nxi23nxmd.01t2.html
Top hits
