Experts in Middle Eastern politics have expressed skepticism about the American assessments of the war's developments from its onset, particularly critiquing Israeli expectations for the Iranian regime's collapse. Mahjoob Al-Zuwari, a scholar and Middle East policy expert, referenced the 1978 situation where American intelligence misjudged the stability of the Shah's regime before its fall, suggesting a similar lack of understanding of the current Iranian system. He argued that the U.S. lacks a nuanced comprehension of Iran’s political structure, which can lead to faulty or exaggerated evaluations, many of which may emerge from a psychological warfare approach or political wishful thinking.

Furthermore, Al-Zuwari highlighted a noticeable contradiction in the American-Israeli strategy, particularly when operations targeting civilian sites coincide with calls for the Iranian populace to rise against the regime. He questioned the feasibility of protests amidst bombardment, emphasizing that such actions create a perception among Iranians that the United States and Israel are not genuinely supportive of their struggle for reform. This contradiction, he posits, undermines the credibility of any external calls for resistance against the Iranian government.

Ultimately, the analysis suggests that both U.S. and Israeli strategies need reevaluation in light of the resilience of the Iranian regime and the complexities of its internal dynamics. Such a reassessment is critical not just for regional policy but also for understanding the limitations of external influences on domestic Iranian affairs, potentially reshaping future diplomatic approaches toward Iran in a turbulent geopolitical landscape.