Life In Humanity Analysis Desk
“How Iran survived the unthinkable. America and Israel failed. America bombed Iran’s nuclear sites, completely flattening them. Immediately after, America agreed to a ceasefire. And the moment the ceasefire was announced, the Iranian President went on national TV and called it ‘a great victory. Then, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Khamenei spoke up, said ‘The American strikes accomplished nothing, and that the country would never surrender.
You might be thinking ‘Wait…You got bombed. Your nuclear facilities are destroyed, millions are fleeing your cities and you are calling this a victory. Here is the thing— they might actually be right. I want to walk you through exactly why step by step. If you think America came out on top in this ceasefire, what I am about to show could seriously change your perspective,” points out the Chinese now well-known for his two May 2024 predictions which materialized as accurately as he issued them, the Professor Jiang Xueqin. For more about him, read this piece and this one.
They couldn’t defeat the United States of America—how they made defeat impossible
Xueqin agrees that Iran stood too weak to win. As a result, he explains that she was obliged to change what winning means. “To understand why Iran may have already won, we need to look at their actual strategy. Iran’s military can’t compete directly with America’s in a head-to-head war. So, instead, they’ve spent decades building what’s called the axis of resistance. It’s a network of allies across the Middle East: Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, armed groups in Iraq, and historically the Assad government in Syria. The idea is simple: you can’t hit America directly— they are too big—but you can poke them everywhere at once, making it impossible for them to relax, refocus on Russia or turn attention to China,” says Xueqin.
“Iran’s goal isn’t to defeat America on a battlefield. It’s to keep America stuck in the region, slowly bleeding resources, attention, and money indefinitely. So, let’s be honest: did the ceasefire help advance that strategy or stop it? June 2025—this is where it all blows up. On June 13, 2025, Israel launched operation Rising Lion, sending over 200 fighter jets— no small number—on roughly 1 500 sorties over 12 days. They struck more than 100 Iranian facilities, including nuclear and military sites, killing key scientists and commanders.”
Xueqin says that from Israel’s perspective, this amounted to the culmination of decades of planning. But Iran didn’t stay arms crossed, though it intensely felt losses. “Iran responded with operation True Promise 3, firing about 55o ballistic missiles, and nearly 1000 drones at Israel over the same 12 days. Most were intercepted— around 90%— so Israel’s defenses largely held. But 31 missiles got through, hitting a power station, an oil refinery in Haifa, and a university. The casualties, 28 dead, mostly civilians, over 3 000 injured, and more than 9 000 displaced.
On the Iranian side, the losses were far more severe. Israeli strikes killed between 1 160 and 1 190 Iranians, injured nearly 5 000 and forced roughly 9 million people to flee Tehran and other major cities. 9 million people— imagine that exodus. Then on June 22— just three days before the ceasefire, the United States entered the conflict directly. American planes dropped bunker-buster bombs on Natanz and Isfahan, Iran’s most critical nuclear facilities.”
Strike outcomes that people generally expected were not they that were exactly achieved. Xueqin explains “The Institute for the Study of War later concluded these strikes would severely limit Iran’s nuclear enrichment for the foreseeable future. By the time, the ceasefire arrived, Iran had lost its nuclear facilities, key commanders and roughly half of its ballistic missile stockpile, either fired at Israel or destroyed in strikes. Catastrophic? On paper, absolutely— but stay with me. The ceasefire itself played out like a tense drama. On June 23, Iran fired 14 missiles at Al Udeid air base in Qatar— one of the most important American bases in the Middle East.
No one was killed. Donald Trump went on social media, essentially thanking Iran for the weak response, signaling ‘All right. Let’s make a deal.’ That same evening, Trump announced a ceasefire brokered through Qatar. Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, quickly clarified ‘There was no formal agreement— but Iran would halt attacks, if Isarel stopped by 4 A.M. Tehran time.’ The next morning, the ceasefire nearly collapsed. Iran continued firing missiles at Beersheba and Northern Israel, showing the fragile, ongoing tension beneath the surface.”
He continues, saying that then Iran claimed that Israel strikes was still carrying strikes on while Israel was “reportedly preparing a massive retaliatory attack. Here is a single detail that shows who really had leverage: Trump pressured Netanyahu to cancel the major strike. In the end, Israel hit only one radar site near Tehran— a tiny fraction of what had been planned. America, the most powerful country on Earth, effectively talked Israel down from retaliation.
Then, miraculously, every side immediately declared victory. Trump called it a ‘victory for everybody’, Netanyahu hailed ‘a historic victory that will stand for generations.” Iran’s President said ‘Great victory’, and Khamenei claimed America gained nothing. So, who’s actually telling the truth?”
Xueqin answers “Here’s the key: winning a war today isn’t just body counts or buildings destroyed. The regime survived. That’s Iran’s main objective. Israel and America entered the conflict, aiming to destroy Iran’s nuclear program and cripple its military. They did serious damage— but the Islamic Republic is still standing. The government didn’t collapse. America’s pivot story faltered. From a Shia perspective, culture shaped by endurance and survival— withstanding a direct attack by the world’s most powerful military and its strongest ally is itself a victory.
Iran flipped the nuclear oversight story. After the ceasefire, Iran parliament voted to end cooperation with the IAEA— the international nuclear watchdog, and signaled it might even leave the nuclear non-proliferation treaty entirely. Iran entered the conflict with a damaged nuclear program but exits with less international scrutiny than before. In the long term, this strengthens their nuclear ambitions.”
They came to end a threat, but got stuck inside it
Xueqin provides another detail proving that Iran’s strategy has actually worked. “For years, Washington talked about reducing its Middle East footprint to focus on China and other priorities. This conflict exposed how tied down the U.S. remains and how Iran’s strategy keeps America engaged in the region indefinitely. The idea that America could leave the Middle East dead,” he says.
“By 2024, the U.S. had over 10 000 troops spread across Bahrain, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and more— plus two aircraft career groups. Does that look like a country pulling out? By 2025 and into 2026 America was more embedded than ever: more troops, more carriers, presidential visits, high-stakes diplomacy. America was stuck. And that’s exactly what Iran’s strategy was designed to achieve.”
According to him, the 12-day confrontation only constituted the start of a larger conflict. He expounds “The Iran 12-day war was just act one. By early 2026, the U.S. and Israel were in open conflict with Iran—and Iran played its most powerful card: the Strait of Hormuz. Early in 2026, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards declared it closed, threatening to destroy any vessel attempting passage. Then comes the critical moment: the U.S. sent a 15-point ceasefire proposal to Iran via Pakistan. The proposal demanded limits on Iran’s nuclear program, missile restrictions, and guaranteed passage through the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for some sanctions relief.
Iran flatly rejected it—instead sending back a counterproposal demanding U.S. recognition of Iranian sovereignty over the strait and war reparations. Now ask yourself ‘Who truly had the leverage? I know which you are thinking ‘Iran lost so much’. The nuclear program was badly damaged, roughly half of ballistic missiles gone, proxies like Hamas and Hezbollah weakened, and Assad’s Syria gutted since 2023, thousands dead. You are right. Much of what Iran lost matters.”
Nevertheless, he cautions “Here is what you have to weigh against it. Six American soldiers died in the 2026 conflict. Oil prices surged above $100 a barrel. America deployed thousands of marines and paratroopers from the 82nd airborne division, on top of the forces already in the region. America entered this conflict, with a stated goal: eliminate Iran as a strategic threat. Yet, Iran is still there, still fighting and still controlling one of the world’s most critical oil choke points.
Think about the message this sends. Any government considering standing up to the U.S. will look at Iran and see that it took the full force of American and Israeli air power— and did not fall. That story travels. Winning and losing in geopolitics isn’t like a football game. There is no final buzzer, no trophy handed out. America wanted to end Iran’s nuclear threat. The sites were damaged. Yes— but Iran now faces less international nuclear oversight. America wanted to stabilize the region. Instead it is more entangled than it’s been in years.”
However, according to him, “Iran, on the other hand, wanted to survive a direct confrontation with the most powerful military on Earth— it did. Iran wanted to keep America stuck in the Middle East—it did. Iran wanted to show the world that sheer strength doesn’t automatically equal victory—that message has been sent.
That does not look like a picture of a country that lost. I am not saying the war is over. The war is ongoing. There are real questions about whether the Iranian economy and its people can absorb long-term damage, whether the axis of resistance can rebuild, and whether the regime can hold together under pressure.”