SPECIAL EPISODE Iran's Breaking Point: Missiles, Miscalculation and Reckoning

In this urgent special episode of At the Boundary, GNSI Research Fellow Dr. Arman Mahmoudian offers in-depth, real-time analysis of the rapidly escalating conflict between Iran and Israel, which has now drawn in the United States. Following a U.S. and Israeli joint strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the geopolitical landscape in the Middle East has shifted dramatically. Mahmoudian breaks down the consequences of the precision bombing campaign, which reportedly dealt serious blows to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, air defenses, and military leadership. He also explores Tehran’s limited response, the strategic calculus behind it, and what this means for the future of U.S. policy in the region.

The conversation covers the potential collapse—or evolution—of Iran’s long-standing Axis of Resistance, the possibility of asymmetric retaliation, and the regime’s internal struggle to maintain control amid leadership losses. This episode delivers timely insights into one of the most consequential flashpoints in international affairs.

Be sure to also check out the GNSI Research Initiative, Axis of Resistance, led by Dr. Mahmoudian. It's a comprehensive analysis of the small group of countries and non-state actors brought together by Iran in a loose coalition to destabilize the region.  

# # # #

At the Boundary from the Global and National Security Institute at the University of South Florida, features global and national security issues we’ve found to be insightful, intriguing, fascinating, maybe controversial, but overall just worth talking about.

A "boundary" is a place, either literal or figurative, where two forces exist in close proximity to each other. Sometimes that boundary is in a state of harmony. More often than not, that boundary has a bit of chaos baked in. The Global and National Security Institute will live on the boundary of security policy and technology and that's where this podcast will focus.

The mission of GNSI is to provide actionable solutions to 21st-century security challenges for decision-makers at the local, state, national and global levels. We hope you enjoy At the Boundary.

Look for our other publications and products on our website publications page.

Transcript

Jim Cardoso: 0:00

Jim, hello everyone. Welcome to a special episode of at the boundary, the podcast from the global and national security Institute at the University of South Florida. I'm Jim Cardoso, Senior Director of GNSI, and your host for at the boundary, because of the events unfolding across Iran, Israel and the rest of the Middle East over the past 12 days, we thought it would be a great idea to bring in GNSI Research Fellow, Dr Armon mahmoudian for a special episode to gather his insights on the conflict that is now directly drawn in the United States. Armon has been on various media sources constantly over the past two weeks, and I highly recommend his analysis on LinkedIn and X even before that, he has been leading a research project here at GNSI called the Axis of Resistance. It's a comprehensive analysis of the group of countries and non state groups brought together by Iran in a loose coalition designed to destabilize the region. End of note, Arman is joining us from vacation, so we need to you know, recognize the dedication. Thank you for that, Arman, and welcome back to the podcast. My pleasure. Thank you for inviting me. I appreciate the kind introduction. As always, great to be here. Thank you. So we are recording this on the afternoon of June 24 and I make that disclaimer because we've watched episodes or, you know, events change on a daily basis, so when this comes out, there could be some adjustments from then, but we're just going to talk about what we know up till June 24 at about 330 in the afternoon, Eastern Time. So Armand what give us a quick summary, from your perspective, where we've been over the past 12 days and where we're at now? Well, I think 12 days ago, on June 13, Israelis believe that

Arman Mahmoudian: 2:03

two facts, the momentum that they had in terms of Iran's weakness, Iran has been weakened since October. So when proxy system completely been, not completely been dismantled, but there has been this de organized. There is no adopting it, naturalized it. Hezbollah is weaker. Hamas is at the verge of losing its territory. As a result of the pictures, Saudis received the serious suffer the serious Saudis hooties Suffer the serious blow from the south, from the Americans and Israelis. So 111, on one hand is Iran was weakened in Israeli assessment and many others. It was the weakest point they had since the Iran Iraq War, and the chances of you finding them in a similar position again in two years, five years, 10 years, it would be risky. You know, you never know what happens, but you never can be assured after two and the second thing was that the Iranian breakthrough to have a build, to build a bomb, was closer, as always, however, you know, I don't want to get to the intelligence assessment debate that How close were they. But what we knew is that the Iran's nuclear project had all component, from the heavy Richter reactor to enrich uranium to underground facilities, to the labs, everything, and the science, the know how to have the bomb, to build the bomb. Iran's stockpile after enriched uranium, was heavily high. It was something about around the 400 kilogram so we were at the situation that if Iran made the political decision to build a bomb, it wouldn't be just a bomb, it would be almost a nuclear arsenal. Estimates was that Iran could, could have been about 10 bomb with the stockpile they had. So there was a chessboard game was set for the Israelis to act on it, and they act on it. They act on it with the precise military operation, but more importantly, with the very sophisticated intelligence operation. They dismantled a good chunk of Iran's at least sophisticated aerial defense. They de organized or decapitated Iran's military leadership, not necessarily through aerial attack outside of Iran, but through the souls they had inside the Tehran and the rest of the country. And from there we got to the exchange of fire between the two countries in which Israelis focus on Iran's military infrastructures, Iran's military leadership and nuclear project and some other components of them, Iranian were much more interested in inflicting pressure on the Israelis population and socialist society. That's why, that's that is why a good chunk of Iranian attacks were discriminatory, basically, attacking both the civilians and military targets. The idea, probably behind of it was that by completely disrupting the daily life of citizen, and Israel, being a democracy, they can make a pressure on the Netanyahu. And you know, you know, pushing or pressing Israelis back to back down both sides reach. In a cease fire yesterday on June 23 which almost was broke hours later in earlier today. June 24 what we know now, what that? What the damages and the losses of the boat side Iran's nuclear project has been seriously damaged, but it is very hard to say, is it completely destroyed or not. There are some news today we have read another news is that the, I believe it was the Wallace Street Journal, you know, quoting from an assistant, or at White House or White House assistant, that it seems one of the component of the border is unharmed. It's very hard to verify it's about 60 meters under the ground or mountain. So it's until the there are inspectation inspections cause what we can say, but what we know, Nathan's is almost gone. The heavy reactor in Iraq is gone. Laboratories and facilities in a small one is complete. It seems to be completely destroyed. The reactor they had in Tehran is out of the picture too. An entire tier of Iran military leadership is gone, the Chief of Staff of the Chief of Staff the command two, commander of the IRGC is back to back, commander of the IRGC ground forces, two, commander of the IRGC intelligence organization, even some former intelligence you know, officers, including the top who was a former intelligence of who was the former commander of IRGC intelligence Iran's ballistic missiles has been and its site production, its manufacture, its fuel production, being heavily damaged. It seems Iran has lost at least about half of its launchers. So now Iran in the position that its manufacture of the missiles has been degraded, but also the cap capability to deliver the missiles, being as an underground the size or the launchers have been also undermined. So the damages on Iranian side is significant. On the Israeli side, the damage is going to be mostly economic, rather than the military. The war itself cost Israel something about $290 million per day only for the air defense. So each day of their air defense operation cost almost a $300 million there is a The report says that about eight to 10,000 Israelis has lost their home during the Iranian attacks. Or, you know, the either totally been destroyed, like the attacks that happened on June 23 later hours, or, you know, badly needs a that repair. Then the Israelis also now are facing a dilemma about the for low and more importantly, I think the question now is that where is Iran's stockpile of the enriched uranium? This 400 kilogram can be a game changer, because there is always a fear that Iran might Iran has the know how of the enriching uranium and building centrifuges. I think that's the reality that we need accept, and I think everybody accepts. So the fear is that Iran might build smaller cell of the enriched uranium here and there, and then use that stock wall that already has to build a bomb, or dirty bomb. So that's the question that Israel is intelligence committee, and I'm sure the United States Intelligence Committee has so far. That's the assessment of the

Jim Cardoso: 8:17

and that was, and that's, I mean, that took, that takes a lot of stuff that's happened over the past 12 days, and capsule boils it down. And there's a lot, I mean, there's a lot of nuance. Understand that that you didn't cover as well, but that was a that was a great summary. Thank you so much. I mean, a big part of it too, obviously, from the US perspective, is us is entry into the conflict. And President Trump, I mean, stated that the goal, the objective, was, Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. You've sort of touched on this, but I'm gonna, I'm gonna ask you to kind of dig into that a bit more. Do you think, did they succeed? Did the us succeed in keeping them from having a nuclear weapon?

Arman Mahmoudian: 8:58

I think United States and the operation against the

Jim Cardoso: 10:56

succeeded in that goal. I've read, you know, not just the ability to build the bomb, to build a bomb, but the will to build a bomb. And I've read two schools of thought, again, assuming the cease fire in place now holds, I've kind of read two schools of thought starting to emerge. One is that Iran will not pursue building the bomb so much because they've, you know, there's a sense that they'll just get swapped again by the Israelis, maybe assisted by the United States. That's school of thought, number one school of thought. Two is, since they have almost nothing left. I mean, they're, like you said, a good part of their missile capability is gone. A great amount of their senior leadership is gone, and so they're gonna have to fill those vacuums as well. The second school's thought as well. That's all we got it to defend ourselves as a nuclear weapon. And they've seen some success from other nations about having especially when you look at Russia and Ukraine, a lot of the time, some of the you know, any sense of lack of activity against Russia is because they had the ability to strike back with nuclear capability. What's your thought on those two schools of thought, and which one do you support more?

Arman Mahmoudian: 12:08

This is a really good question, and I think that's one of the most important questions right now. Look, Iran, it's very delicate position. Was Iran been attacked by two countries within the last two weeks that they both have nuclear weapons. At least one of them has and the other, allegedly the Israelis. So it makes an impact on your decision making, I think, which way Iran goes to build a bomb or to completely, you know, distance itself from the bomb, because there's always option of being a Japan. You know, after World War Two, the cost of World War Two was so heavy for the Japan is that for a long time, they didn't wanted to do anything with the armed forces. They even called the military the defense forces. I mean, they were really, really persistent to kind of then there was a desire among the German part, the Japanese public, to lesser extent, the German, but the German were facing the territorial split after the Cold War, the impact for them was a bit different. So there is a chance that Iranian might do that, but there is also a chance that the Iranians, as you said, want to get the build the stronger deterrence. I think there is another factor that plays a role in it, and the factor that plays a role in it is that to what extent Israelis wants to leverage Iran's military weakness. So let's say that Israel wants to apply the zero tolerance policy toward Iran, which is a policy they have in Lebanon, and basically means that whenever or wherever that Israel feels something is happening that might treat an Israeli security they targeted, and they're actively doing it in Lebanon. They are doing it in Gaza too, for the very reasonable reasons. Let's say that they want to do this in Iran. There is air defense being built. There is a ballistic missile site over here. They want to target. That would put Iranian in the position to find out, well, with this, we cannot be a sovereign estate. We can't do anything. So we need to have a jackpot call in order to, you know, to tell them that, look, there is one thing else that I have in mind, or I have in my pocket, if the application of the zero policy to against the Iran Israel's goal, I think the likelihood of the Islamic Republic seeks somewhat of a nuclear bomb is more likely, if not, I that's a different question. It's very hard still to answer, yeah, but I think less likely Yeah,

Jim Cardoso: 14:34

it is hard to answer. And I mean, you know, in the past, we could say, well, you know, Israel's actions will normally have a level of support, or least alignment with US national interest. But the last 12 days has shown that sometimes Israelis are just going to do what the Israelis think they got to do. They're going to do what's in their best national interest. And really, in this case, it seems like the US sort of got pulled. Pulled into it, towards something that multiple administrations have, I mean, for you know, third three decades, administration said Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. And it's sort of like the US sort of got hold into action here to actually do something about that. So now that that's been done, you know, Iran, they launched some missiles at us, forces in Qatar that really didn't seem to have much impact that, I mean to you, does that seem almost like a half hearted effort by Iran just to kind of say, well, we did something, but not really something that would escalate things?

Arman Mahmoudian: 15:35

Well, absolutely, absolutely look, first of President Trump himself confirmed that Iranian let the Americans know there was an advance notice in his social media troops so shocked him, he tanked Iranian for the early notice. And I was tracking the events in the Persian Gulf. Qatar shot down its airspace about two hours before the Iranian missile attack. Not Iraqis, not us Qatar, later on, join on. So I think there was a really preparation because, and it wasn't like Ayatollah Khomeini was concerned about the life of the American soldiers. It was purely a pragmatic decision for Iran, opening a second front of war would be the exact result that had for the Germany. Or even worse, during the World War Two, in the 1941 they already had significant problem with the British. Then they decided, okay, you know what? We are really busy with the English now. We are also going to invade the

Jim Cardoso: 16:31

right let's go attack Russia. What a great idea that was. Yeah, exactly. And you

Arman Mahmoudian: 16:35

know how it turned for them? It changed. It changed entirely their faith. And I think Islamic Republic was very much happened if they have done something to seriously damage the Americans that might have been the end of the Islamic Republic as an entity that we know, at least in a shape that we at least see it. Yeah,

Jim Cardoso: 16:53

do you think that, though there may be some other counteractions lurking out there, maybe something asymmetric? You know, there's been a lot of discussion about some type of cyber attack on us infrastructure, or something like that. You see that still lurking out there as a possibility?

Arman Mahmoudian: 17:11

Yes, there is a speculation about many things, the cyber attacks, the so called sleeper cells. I would say there might be some demonstration of the capability, but not necessarily an aggressive attack. And what do I mean is that,

Jim Cardoso: 17:33

is that, almost, for like, internal purposes more than external, like maybe to Yeah, to show the Iranian people, yes, we're doing something. We are, we're counter, we're counter attacking, but not really to inflame the situation. Extra,

Arman Mahmoudian: 17:46

exactly, yeah, exactly, to kind of, you know, send a signal to the people, and also maybe send a signal to the foreigners that, yes, they have a stuff to buy. You know, how to walk you with it. So, but I really doubt that at this point, it's it just not. It's not rational, and it's not in their interest to do something like the damage to the strategic interest or the life of the Americans or other countries that to do it right now, they are in a very, very weak position. They have a lot to recover. There's a great chance that they won't recover from a good chunk of the damage been done to them. It just doesn't seem rational. But the states can be rational too. So I want to just, you know, put this, this whole idea that the states always operate rational is a myth. We have seen countries being irrational on and off, so I don't know, but it's not rational. I can't tell that. Yeah,

Jim Cardoso: 18:39

Iran's, I mean, their number one goal, in a lot of ways, is to preservation of the of the administration, preservation of the Islamic State of Iran, and not that to from everything I've always heard and read that that is that, by far, it goes beyond any of their other national interests, which being, you know, the elimination of Israel, being the elimination of the injection of the United States from the area the, you know, keeping propping up their, their their, their various arms of the of the Axis of Resistance. You see that, you see them being able to maintain that though, through this, right?

Arman Mahmoudian: 19:21

Yes, and that is true. Ayatollah Khomeini, the founding father of the Islamic Republic, in one of his main, very important speeches, one says that in Farsi have seen his own English translation would be the perception or the protection of the establishment is the highest mandate. And he goes further, that if between the protecting the establishment survival and doing prayer, you have to choose one, you are going to choose the protection of the state. So I during this campaign, I asked why, and I've been interviewed about that, can these attacks led to the collapse of regime? My. My personal assessment is that, no, I haven't seen any evidence. Historically speaking, the aerial campaign solely can lead to the collapse of the government. If the aerial campaign is followed by somewhat of a ground operation, either foreign invasion, invasion or mass local armed uprising, that can lead but if you just attack a country from the air, and that's historically speaking, doesn't do it unless the country is very weak and have a very fragile infrastructure. Already, in terms of Iran, the government is damaged. But one thing that they show, and I think they should be very mindful, when actually I'm writing a paper about it, is that Islamic Republic, despite all of this, is, you know, weaknesses. They did a good job. It seems, on coop proofing the military leadership in almost gone. They brought new people. But we haven't seen much of a, you know, reports that the IRGC, or atage, the conventional one army, wanted to revolt or have a mutiny or remove the leadership. And we also haven't seen any report that the high leadership of Iranian military have the effect. So it seems, in picking people at the top, they kind of did a good job, in doing a counter intelligence and all, they couldn't do any wars job. But on that front, they kind of, I think they need to get the credit. What would happen right now is, I believe, the main problem that Islamic Republic has is not protecting the establishment. Right now is protecting the transition of power once Ayatollah Khomeini dies, Ayatollah Khomeini is in his late 80s. So His time is coming sooner or later, and almost his entire military henchmen, those people he relied on it since the Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in 2020 until buchari, and many people who've been killed in during the Israelis strike are out of picture right now. And those people were people who were supposed to guarantee and smooth the transition of power to his successor, a successor that he had in mind. Yeah. I think now Islamic Republic needs to find a solution that in absence of those reliable people, how they can smooth the transition when the time comes. That's the main problem of order.

Jim Cardoso: 22:18

Hmm, very interesting. One last question. So looking kind of beyond the, you know, the Thrash of the past 12 days, you've been doing research on the Axis of Resistance. You've started a few months ago. You're continuing it through the through the fall. You're going to continue to cover it. What's your take on its future? You and I have talked about the fact that last year was, you know, to quote the the old children's book was the very bad, no good, awful year for Iran, and that's seeming to have continued into this year as well. I mean, so the Axis of Resistance, the many arm, the many tentacles of that axis, a lot of them are, are either gone or seriously degraded. And then Iran, as you said, you know itself from the from the you know, except for the very top and a lot of the senior leadership has been decapitated as well. What's the future look like for that Axis of Resistance?

Arman Mahmoudian: 23:07

It's really good. It's a very good question. I appreciate you asking yes, we in a initiative and or in our episodes. I asked this question to minion. I encourage you know that our audience to go and watch the interview we had, I had with the general Dr Vladimir, and also the first episode, the one with the DR Meloni and the panel on Iran, I think the assumption right now is the whole idea of forward defense, which was establishing proxies and having them to fight your fight. Work for the Islamic Republic for about three to four decades. For three decades, it deters foreign invasion. It helped Iran to advance its influence. But there is a time for everything to come. There is a time of exploration. You know, I believe October 7 Yahya, sad war by launching the terrorist attack against Israeli civilian and military Muslim civilian on the October 7 of 2023 marked the end of the Axis of Resistance. But what do I mean by end? It's not like that the Axis of Resistance would be out of the picture. These mini shows always will be at some level of capacity. Even Hamas wouldn't be completely eradicated, because the ideology will be there. It will be weaker, though, like the al Qaeda or ISIS, it is still there, but not as powerful as it used to be. I think what would happen, and that's the essence that I get, from our guests to Iran, is going to heavily reshuffle its defense, security and regional doctrine, meaning less reliance on the militias now, because, evidently, the Iran being invaded, so the primarily goal of having the militias, the deterring other parties, has failed. Iran doesn't have the largest stick. That it used to have to support them. Assad is no longer in the picture. So Hezbollah might no longer be the priority of Iran's regional policy. I think what will be happen, and just my anticipation, might be wrong in a close future, if Islamic Republic survive all of these and the cease fire goes to the place and tomorrow, there wouldn't be a ground invasion of Iran or a strike Iraqi strike at Allah Khomeini, because that also changed things too. Iran would first shift its military doctrine mostly on air defense capability, Air Force, if they can buy it, and second, most likely, they would prioritize Iraq and Yemen to Lebanon, Syria and media and the Palestine. So even the priorities of scale, which in past used to be Hezbollah and Syria, would change the Hezbollah in Syria, they like it or not, they cannot have a priority. But the Hezbollah would no longer be priority. Iraq would be priority because in Iraq is not the mat only a matter of deterrence or forward defense. Iraq, historically, is, speaking, actually been a source of threat to Iran, because it's a vibrant country. Is very resourceful. If it's the it get itself stabilized, it can actually project trade against Iran. I think influence in Iraq and Yemen would be priority, and Islamic Republic would readjust its the right stuff. It's monetary doctrine and ambitions

Jim Cardoso: 26:23

that is. That's fantastic analysis. I mean, we could talk about this all day. There's so many nuances, but we want to keep this tight, just for our audience, so they can we can get this out. Hopefully things won't change too much before we record this and and we actually publish it. But Armand, thank you so much for joining us from an undisclosed location, which I don't know looks strange like your living room, but I'll just call it an undisclosed location on vacation. Thank you for joining us today. So many. Thanks to GNSI research fellow Dr Armond makhmutan for keeping us current and informed on the events unfolding every hour, basically, in Iran, Israel in the Middle East. He's also frequent contributor BBC Persia programming, and like I said, You'll see him on LinkedIn and X, a great analysis there, and he's currently leading genocide Axis of Resistance research, a comprehensive analysis of the countries and non state actors assembled by Iran over the years, specializing in malign influence over the region. Fact, the latest video for that project just dropped this past week on our YouTube channel. Be sure to check it out next week on at the boundary in our regular episode, we'll be checking in with author, Dr Jeff rogg, who's also a senior research fellow here at GNSI. His new book, The Spy in the state, the history of American intelligence, has grabbed national attention around the intelligence community. We're looking forward to that interview. It's going to be a great conversation. Don't miss it. That's going to wrap up this episode of at the boundary. Each new episode will feature global and national security issues we found to be insightful, intriguing, maybe controversial, but overall, just worth talking about. I'm Jim Cardoso, and we'll see you at the boundary. You.