As the war enters its twelfth day, a clearer picture is emerging of Iran’s new method of fighting. Instead of limiting itself to direct retaliation against Israel or American bases, Tehran is expanding the scope of targeting across three overlapping levels: sensitive maritime corridors, the eyes of warning and defence systems, and the civilian spaces that give the American and regional presence its image of stability.
This shift has appeared in the escalating threats around the Strait of Hormuz, in strikes that hit radar sites and facilities linked to military communications in the Gulf, and in American reporting about hotels and other soft sites being targeted because they are used or frequented by American military personnel and contractors.
The Israeli press picked up on this shift early from two angles. The first is that the Strait of Hormuz has become an active theatre of operations after reports of mines, mine-laying vessels, and American strikes on 16 Iranian vessels near the strait. The second is that Iran, despite the decline in launch intensity compared with the opening days, is not out of the war. It is instead trying to change the way it distributes fire and selects targets.
Detail
Hormuz: From a closure threat to actual disruption!
The first and most sensitive shift has appeared in the Strait of Hormuz. American and Israeli reports pointed to signs of Iranian preparations to mine the passage, while U.S. Central Command announced that it had destroyed 16 Iranian vessels designated for mine-laying near the strait. At the same time, international maritime bodies effectively treated the strait, the Gulf, and the Gulf of Oman as a war zone, while oil traffic disruption continued and concern spread over the possibility of commercial shipping being hit. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations agency also recorded vessels struck by unknown projectiles and a fire breaking out on one of them inside the strait.
The effects here go well beyond the immediate military field. The strait, through which roughly one fifth of the world’s oil passes, has become a daily pressure point on the market, to the extent that international agencies have discussed the largest possible release from strategic reserves in the history of the International Energy Agency in an effort to calm prices.
That means Hormuz has become an Iranian coercive tool for multiplying costs for the entire world, not just for Washington and Tel Aviv.
The radar war: Hitting the eye before the arm!
The second shift is the most important militarily. In the American signals that have emerged in recent hours, there is a clear emphasis on Iran moving to strike the systems that allow the United States to intercept incoming waves in the first place. American press reports have spoken of an early warning system being targeted at Al Udeid, three radar domes being hit at Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, and damage near satellite communications infrastructure at Ali Al Salem Air Base. The operational idea is clear: weaken detection and coordination before any later wave, and open gaps in the THAAD, Patriot, and wider missile defence umbrella.
This also fits a broader Israeli reading that Iran is learning from its previous experience. In Israeli coverage, the decline in the number of missiles or drones is not viewed as surrender, but as a form of repositioning: preserving part of its capability and using it against targets of higher value and greater impact. That is why a different question is emerging in the Israeli media. It is no longer only about how many missiles Iran has left, but about which targets it will choose when it wants to inflict pain with the fewest possible strikes.
Hotels and soft sites: Striking the image of safety!
The third shift is the most disturbing politically and psychologically. According to American reporting citing military officials, a militia in Iraq carried out a drone attack on a luxury hotel in Erbil that housed American personnel, suggesting that Tehran or its allies now view hotels, accommodation sites, and similar facilities as part of the operational infrastructure of the American presence. This is an important development because it changes the definition of the target through the environment that allows forces to work, move, and stay.
Here the military message overlaps with the economic one. Targeting hotels, airports, and high-end civilian facilities is intended to break the image of the Gulf as a space where business, tourism, and finance can continue separately from war. For that reason, in this type of conflict, the hotel becomes more than a civilian building. It becomes a symbol of stability, and striking it means Tehran wants to say that regional prosperity itself can enter the target bank if the war continues. This meaning aligns with Israeli coverage that speaks of the widening effect of the war on business, energy, and transport in the region.
What do the numbers say about this shift?
The Pentagon says Iranian attacks have declined sharply, with ballistic strikes down by around 90 percent and one-way attack drones down by around 83 percent since the start of the operation. But at the same time, it confirmed that 7 American troops have been killed and nearly 140 wounded, while Reuters reported that the number had been in the range of 150 before the Pentagon settled on the lower figure. This paradox matters: the volume of fire has fallen, but Iran’s ability to inflict pain has not disappeared.
What next?
The current trajectory suggests that the next phase may see a race across three files at once: protecting Hormuz and preventing it from becoming a lever of global paralysis, restoring the technical eyes of American defence in the Gulf, and preventing the Iranian target bank from expanding further toward more sensitive civilian facilities in work, accommodation, and energy environments. If Tehran pushes further in this direction, the war will look less like a conventional missile war and more like a broad regional disruption campaign in which military geography is fused with economics and nerves.
Analysis
What Iran is doing now, beyond being an indiscriminate widening of fire, is an attempt to redefine the target itself. The Strait of Hormuz means economic survival. Radars mean vision. Hotels point to stability. When these three are placed in one basket, the message becomes clear: if Washington wants a war of attrition against Iran, Tehran will try to turn it into a war of attrition against the regional order on which the United States and its allies depend.
The problem in this equation is that Iranian success, which means little more than regime survival, runs through its ability to raise the cost of protection, unsettle markets, turn soft sites into points of anxiety, and prove that it is still capable of learning and adapting despite the strikes. That is why the most accurate headline at this stage is that Iran is not just rearranging its retaliatory priorities. It is redrawing the entire target bank: from gunpowder to business, from the base to the image, and from the missile to the nerve centre.
