After 12 days of conflict, Israel and Iran tell their dead and strategic losses

At the end of 12 days of bombing, drones, missiles and cross retaliation, Israel and Iran declared victory. But behind the discourse, the numbers of the so -called “12 -day war” reveal a much more complex scenario: human devastation, political wear and little ability to alter the regional balance of forces. The truce, sewn under US diplomatic pressure, also affected by wear, follows under latent tension.

The attempt by both governments of presenting conflict as a demonstration of force hides weaknesses exposed throughout the combat: Israel deals with an increasingly fragmented internal political environment and criticism of the war by the government of Benjamin Netanyahu; Iran, though hard hit, maintains its resistance capacity, even with considerable losses in its arsenal and the military summit. The effort to spread pamphlets in Persian to incite the Iranian people against the theocratic regime only served to add popular support and strengthen it.

Israel: political fragility in the midst of military superiority

Even with technological superiority and direct support from the United States, Israel left the most politically vulnerable war. Iran’s attacks have reached strategic targets, such as an electric plant, an oil refinery and a university, as well as oblige the country to issue more than 21,000 alerts to civilians and deal with nearly 10,000 internal displaced people.

Iran aimed mainly Tel Aviv and areas around, and one of the significant attacks was the Soroka Medical Center – an attack that injured dozens. Among other targets were the Israeli Military Intelligence School, the Haifa Interior Ministry, the Weizmann Institute of Sciences, an oil refinery and power plants.

Internally, the Netanyahu government faces growing contestation: the climbing with Iran has aggravated the international isolation of Israel, already combined by the prolonged war in Gaza, and showed the limits of its regional dissuasion. Political opposition and army sectors question the effectiveness of the Israeli response, even in the face of more than a thousand air attacks against Iran and the destruction of 80 Iranian anti -aircraft batteries.

In addition, the social impact of war, with 138 cases of acute psychological disorders between 3,238 injured and damage to dozens of homes, feeds the wear of Netanyahu’s image, already pressured by complaints and protests. According to the Ministry of Health of Israel, 28 was the number of people killed. Many residents affected by the Iranian attacks from Tel Aviv to Haifa managed to escape to anti -aircraft shelters where the 12 days remained.

Iran: strategic losses, but intact survival

Iran paid a high price, with hundreds of dead and injured, including 30 military commanders and 14 nuclear scientists. It was hard hit by US-launched antibunker bombs, which reached key nuclear facilities such as Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. But even with a significant reduction in its ballistic and air capacity, the country has shown that it still has sufficient retaliation power to threaten Israel and destabilize the region.

According to Iran’s Ministry of Health and Medical Education, 4,746 people were injured, 610 were killed and the public infrastructure was damaged. Seven hospitals were damaged among other health facilities. Almost 9 million people drove out of major cities, especially Tehran.

According to Israeli estimates, Iran has lost two thirds of its ballistic missile launchers and nearly 1,000 drones in its 120 attacks on Israel. Still, 550 missiles and a thousand drones were released during the conflict, and 31 missiles reached populated or strategic areas in Israel. The ability to cause direct damage, although limited by the interception of 90% of artifacts, reinforces the image that Iran remains a relevant and resilient actor, even in the face of the military alliance between Israel and the US.

The Iranian regime still used war as a tool for internal cohesion. The 700 arrests and three executions on charges of connection with Israel show an attempt to strengthen domestic political control and signal strength against dissent.

Ceasefire tense, without background solution

The US-mediated ceasefire, which has been in force since Tuesday (24), does not solve the structural factors of climbing. Both sides remain in military readiness, and the risk of new clashes persists – both directly and through allied regional actors such as Hezbollah and Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria.

Despite material and human losses, Iran leaves conflict without surrendering, without giving in in their nuclear or regional positions. Already Israel, even though he has avoided an internal collapse, now faces the strategic crossroads of how Tehran contains without expanding his own diplomatic isolation and without exhausting his ability to mobilize domestic mobilization.

Narrative War: What is behind the “victory” on each side?

More than a military confrontation, the 12 -day war was also a narrative dispute. Both Netanyahu and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei tried to convert a high human cost conflict into internal political triumph. In the US, Donald Trump – who coined the term “12 -day war” – also tries to explore the episode as a demonstration of geopolitical leadership, aiming at the elections.

Trump’s own articulation for a ceasefire was a demonstration of fear by US public opinion. He, who was already coming from domestic wear with the war against immigrants, had to breach the campaign promise not to involve the US in new wars and focus on the fight against inflation. Instead, the threat of blocking the Strait of Ormez by Iran would also become another inflationary factor around the world, with the increase of the oil barrel.

But the facts do not support clear victories. With more than 630 dead, thousands of injuries, terrified civilians and under threat cities, the balance of conflict reinforces the urgency of rethinking the logic of permanent confrontation in the Middle East. Neither the Israeli technological dissuasion, nor the rhetoric of Iranian resistance, prevented human tragedy. The “victory” proclaimed by both in this context, has bitter taste – and still unpredictable consequences.