The air is thick with the hum of unseen drones. It’s a distant rumble that could be thunder. It might also be something far worse. I’m sitting here, scrolling through news alerts, wondering how a nation’s defenses can crumble so quietly.

It’s unsettling, isn’t it? The idea that Iran, a country that’s spent decades building its military reputation, could be left so exposed. In a recent interview, James Dorsey made a startling claim. He is an adjunct senior fellow at the S Rajaratnam School of International Studies. Iran’s air defenses, once touted as formidable, seem to have vanished under Israeli strikes. But why? And what does this mean for a region teetering on the edge of chaos? Let’s dig into it, even if the answers aren’t as neat as we’d like.

A Barrage Unlike Before

Iran’s response to Israel’s recent strikes—targeting nuclear sites and assassinating top commanders—won’t be a polite warning shot. Dorsey predicts a “fiercer” missile barrage, a stark contrast to last year’s carefully calibrated attacks. Those were demonstrations, flexes of capability meant to say, We can hit you if we want. This time, Iran wants to hurt. The missiles will likely be deadlier, the intent unambiguous.

Think about the 2024 barrages: hundreds of missiles, but Israel’s multilayered defenses—bolstered by U.S. and allied systems—swatted most away. Iran knows this. So why escalate? It’s pride, strategy, and survival. A nation humiliated by exposed vulnerabilities can’t afford to look weak. But here’s the catch: Iran’s not just fighting Israel. It’s weighing options like striking U.S. bases in the region. Dorsey suggests they’ll avoid hitting Saudi Arabia or the UAE. They want to prevent alienating Gulf allies. Asymmetric attacks—covert operations, proxy militias, or strikes on Israeli assets in third countries—are also on the table. It’s a high-stakes chess game, and Iran’s playing with half the board in shadow.

The Air Defense Mystery

Here’s what I noticed: Iran’s air defenses, or lack thereof, are the real story. Israel claimed last year it obliterated them, and recent strikes seem to confirm it. No anti-aircraft fire, no interceptors lighting up the sky. Israeli jets reportedly flew over Iranian airspace unchallenged. How does a nation with Iran’s resources—decades of investment in Russian and homegrown systems—end up this vulnerable?

It’s not just about hardware. Iran’s air defenses, like the S-300 systems or domestic Bavar-373, rely on radar networks and command coordination. If Israel’s electronic warfare jammed those, or if cyberattacks disrupted command chains, the systems might as well be scrap metal. Add to that the strain of sanctions—spare parts are hard to come by, and maintenance suffers. A real example? Look at Syria, where Iranian-supplied defenses have repeatedly failed against Israeli strikes. It’s a pattern: sophisticated on paper, brittle in practice.

But there’s a counterpoint. Maybe Iran’s holding back, preserving assets for a bigger fight. Or maybe the strikes hit so fast, defenses couldn’t react. Either way, the silence of Iran’s skies raises questions about their military’s true strength. It also raises questions about whether they’ve oversold their capabilities for years.

A Flawed Strategy, A Fragile Dance

You ever wonder why diplomacy feels like shouting into a void? Dorsey points to Trump’s approach: a mix of ultimatums and wishful thinking. Trump hopes Israel’s strikes will push Iran to negotiate a new nuclear deal. However, Iran’s appetite for talks—set for Sunday—seems dead. Tehran’s perspective? Why negotiate when you’re being humiliated? Trump’s “do what I say or else” tone doesn’t help, and Israel’s strikes, greenlit by Netanyahu despite U.S. hesitations, complicate things further.

Iran’s not blameless. Its rhetoric—Holocaust denial, anti-Semitic tropes—alienates potential mediators and fuels Israel’s narrative of an existential threat. Yet, from Tehran’s view, Israel’s attacks are proof the U.S. can’t be trusted to restrain its ally. It’s a cycle of mistrust, and nobody’s stepping off the carousel. The irony? Both sides want de-escalation but keep choosing paths that make war more likely.

Can Israel Handle Another Front?

Israel’s juggling wars in Gaza and the West Bank, now imposing a siege there too. You’d think their resources are stretched thin, but Dorsey disagrees. Gaza and the West Bank can be held in a “holding position,” freeing up forces for Iran. Israel’s military, with its advanced air force and missile defenses, dwarfs Iran’s. Iran’s air force is negligible—aging U.S. and Soviet-era jets, no match for Israel’s F-35s.

Public support in Israel is another factor. Despite war fatigue, Dorsey says Israelis view Iran as an existential threat, rallying behind strikes even if the timing’s debated. Contrast that with Iran. Public sentiment there is harder to gauge. It is likely split. Anger at Israel is tempered by economic woes and distrust of the regime’s priorities.

What’s Left Unsaid

Maybe that’s the problem. We’re so focused on missiles and defenses, we miss the human cost. Families in Iran, Israel, and beyond live under the shadow of escalation, knowing a misstep could ignite a regional firestorm. Iran’s failed defenses aren’t just a military embarrassment. They signal fragility in a system stretched by ambition and isolation. Israel’s strength, meanwhile, comes at the cost of perpetual vigilance, a nation that can’t afford to blink.

And yet, what do I know? Maybe the real question isn’t why Iran’s defenses failed. Perhaps it is why we keep expecting technology and bravado to solve what’s fundamentally a human problem. Silence, in the end, might say enough.