A rare and intense military standoff between Iran and Israel, dubbed the “Twelve-Day War” by regional media, unfolded in June 2025. Though brief in duration, the confrontation marked a turning point in Middle Eastern military dynamics due to its tactical depth, wide geographic spread, and strategic consequences. Understanding its full nature requires examining the war through contemporary military theory. Three analytical models stand out: Warden’s Five Rings, Shock and Awe doctrine, and Hybrid Warfare. Each offers critical insights, though only one truly captures the complexity of the war.
Warden’s Five Rings: A Theory of Structural Paralysis
Colonel John Warden, a U.S. Air Force strategist, developed the Five Rings model in the 1990s. He viewed the enemy as a living system made up of five concentric rings: leadership, key processes, infrastructure, population, and military forces. Unlike classical warfare, which begins with direct military confrontation, Warden’s model starts by targeting leadership—the innermost ring. This approach was famously employed during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.
Israel's initial strikes during the Twelve-Day War—targeting Iran’s command centers and critical infrastructure, including nuclear and military sites in Isfahan, Karaj, and Damghan—reflected this model. However, Iran’s counterattack, which involved precision missile strikes, support from allied resistance forces, cyber operations, and psychological warfare, deviated from Warden’s linear framework. While Warden’s theory explains Israel’s opening strategy, it fails to account for multi-layered warfare or the role of non-state actors, making it inadequate as a comprehensive lens.
Shock and Awe: Swift Intimidation with Limited Staying Power
The Shock and Awe doctrine, popularized during the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, focuses on overwhelming an adversary through sudden, high-intensity strikes aimed at causing psychological paralysis.
Israel attempted to employ this doctrine by launching rapid strikes intended to disrupt Iran’s command capabilities. But Iran’s response—measured, phased, and multi-pronged—undermined the intended effect. Rather than falling into disarray, Tehran retaliated swiftly and strategically, leveraging asymmetrical tools to counterbalance Israel’s technological superiority. The doctrine of Shock and Awe ultimately proved insufficient and short-lived in this theater of war.
Hybrid Warfare: The Dominant and Accurate Framework
Hybrid warfare represents a new paradigm in strategic thinking. It blends military, cyber, media, economic, and diplomatic tools to create pressure from multiple angles. This form of conflict avoids conventional frontlines, relying instead on ambiguity, tactical diversity, and multi-layered surprises.
The Iranian response during the Twelve-Day War aligned precisely with this model:
Precision missile strikes shifted the psychological balance and demonstrated Iran’s capability to hit selected targets with accuracy and intent.
Cyber operations disrupted Israel’s early warning systems without risking ground forces.
Proxy resistance groups intensified geographical and political pressure on Israel.
Media campaigns and psychological ops fueled domestic unrest within Israel and shaped international perceptions.
Crucially, Iran avoided full-scale war while inflicting substantial strategic costs on its adversary.
Diplomacy Within Hybrid Warfare: A Silent But Strategic Weapon
One often-overlooked dimension of hybrid warfare is active diplomacy during combat operations. Iran’s diplomatic outreach during the war was deliberate and strategic:
Direct communications with regional powers such as Iraq, Oman, Qatar, and Russia helped manage escalation and warned off potential Israeli allies.
Tehran leveraged firm statements from its strategic allies to pressure Israel on the global stage and curb further military action.
Media diplomacy created a narrative of justified defense, portraying Israel as the aggressor in forums such as the United Nations and global public opinion.
These moves showed that diplomacy in hybrid warfare is no longer a post-conflict mechanism but an integral part of the fight itself. Just as cyberattacks and media influence have claimed space on the modern battlefield, diplomacy has evolved from “peacetime politics” into a wartime weapon.
A Strategic Turning Point
The Twelve-Day War represents a conceptual shift in how wars are fought in the Middle East. It revealed that against Western-style militaries—and Israel as their regional proxy—a sophisticated hybrid strategy can outmaneuver conventional power. In this new model, victory is not won through tank counts or air superiority but through the coordinated use of narrative, regional alliances, cyber disruption, and smart military retaliation.
If one theory best explains this conflict, it is unquestionably hybrid warfare—a framework that not only fits the facts but also highlights Iran’s evolution from a traditional military actor to a strategic force with its own 21st-century war doctrine. While Israel drew on models like Warden’s rings and Shock and Awe for its initial attacks, Iran’s response embodied a hybrid approach—driven not by brute force, but by soft power, tactical integration, and strategic design.
NOURNEWS