WANA (Jun 16) – Field developments in the second phase of the Iran–Israel conflict have entered a new stage—one where psychological operations, symbolic maneuvers, and efforts to shape public perception have begun to replace traditional military initiatives. Yet the upper hand still belongs to the side that manages to impose its will on the battlefield earlier and more effectively.

 

Page One: A Preemptive Strike to Demonstrate Resolve

In response to the provocations in Tehran, Iran launched a preemptive missile strike, delivering a clear and calculated message. This time, the missiles did not hit Haifa or Tel Aviv, but rather targeted areas beyond them. The choice of these locations suggests that Iran’s goal at this stage was not maximum destruction, but rather to assert its resolve and redefine the boundaries of deterrence.

 

Page Two: Tel Aviv’s Focus on Psychological Warfare in Tehran

Israel, in contrast, shifted its tactic from symmetrical retaliation to urban sabotage within Tehran. The aim: to instill fear in society and regain the initiative through psychological warfare. However, early indications suggest that these actions have remained within the realm of psychological operations and have failed to produce any strategic shift on the ground.

Narmak , 15 June 2025

Israel’s missile struck the southern side of Narmak, causing injuries and fatalities among civilian residents / WANA News Agency

Page Three: Striking Empty Buildings

This morning, several government buildings in Tehran were targeted. Yet on-the-ground reports confirm that all these sites had been evacuated in advance. It appears these strikes were not intended to cause real operational impact, but rather to compensate for the blow Iran delivered the night before. Firing for display has replaced firing for the sake of shifting the balance.

 

Page Four: The U.S. Shadow Over the Battlefield

While the possibility of direct U.S. involvement is being raised more than ever, realities on the ground tell a different story. Military analysts argue that even if the U.S. were to enter the conflict, it would not fundamentally alter the core dynamics of the war. This is because the current conflict is being shaped not by the sides’ military capabilities, but by their willingness to bear the consequences of escalation.

 

As this phase concludes, what stands out most is Iran’s insistence on controlling the tempo of the conflict and avoiding a game designed by Tel Aviv. Analysis suggests the war is shifting toward a contest of messaging and emotional management—a space where a single misstep could cost far more than just an explosion.

The Second Round of Iranian Missile Strikes on Occupied Territories in Day Three of the Iran-Israel War, June 15, 2025. Social media/ WANA News Agency