For much of the past four decades, the strategic debate over Iran has revolved around one recurring assumption that Tehran is a fundamentally reactive power. Whether responding to sanctions, assassinations, cyberattacks, or military strikes, Iran has often been portrayed as a state whose actions are driven primarily by retaliation. This assumption has shaped Washington’s military posture, informed the security calculations of America’s Gulf partners, and reinforced the belief that overwhelming military superiority would ultimately constrain Iran’s ambitions. That assumption is becoming dangerously obsolete. The latest assessment by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and the Critical Threats Project should not be read merely as another battlefield update. It is better understood as a warning that many policymakers continue […]