Professor Mohammad Marandi discusses Iran’s military capabilities, the Strait of Hormuz, US attacks, and Tehran’s ties with Russia and China on Al Mayadeen’s The Great Standoff: Iran and the World.Iran’s growing confidence in its military capabilities has changed the balance of power in West Asia, according to Iranian academic and political analyst Dr. Mohammad Marandi, who said Tehran now sees clear limits to US military power and is increasingly prepared to exploit them.Speaking on Al Mayadeen’s The Great Standoff: Iran and the World, Marandi outlined a regional landscape in which Iran is gradually revealing more of its military capabilities while putting increasing pressure on Washington. He maintained that the US has yet to fully recognize the changes that have taken place since the start of the US aggression against Iran.The shift is particularly visible at sea. Iran recently tested a new anti-ship missile and has used such weapons against vessels, while refraining from directly targeting US naval ships to give Washington “one last opportunity to pull back.”That restraint, however, does not mean Iran lacks the ability to escalate. Tehran has declared a no-passage zone as part of efforts to tighten its control over the Strait of Hormuz and the flow of energy through the waterway, a move Marandi linked directly to US pressure.Iran increases pressure through the Strait of Hormuz“So Iran, when the US Secretary of State said that he is going to strangle Iran, he basically gave the Iranians the right to tighten the noose around the Strait of Hormuz, to make the Strait of Hormuz smaller and smaller and more difficult to pass through,” Marandi said.Iran has nevertheless continued allowing some vessels to pass, including ships belonging to countries that have not participated in the US aggression, such as China and Iraq. Oman, he noted, has also not partaken in the US military campaign.The restrictions become more consequential for ships heading toward ports belonging to countries that assisted Washington. As US pressure increases, Marandi expects Tehran to tighten those restrictions further.He also portrayed the Iranian military position as extending beyond the immediate waters of the strait, revealing that Fujairah is effectively under Iranian control. If Tehran decides that ships should not enter the area, he maintained, “they will not.”Rather than seeking to destroy the region, Marandi presented Iran’s approach as a gradual demonstration of military and strategic authority. Tehran, he argued, has deliberately avoided using the full extent of its capabilities against regional countries that have supported the US.The message to Washington is therefore a final warning. Continued US aggression against Iran, he cautioned, would bring increasingly severe consequences.Iran shifts from defense to offensive actionThe changing military posture has also affected the way Iran responds to US attacks. Marandi pointed to recent Iranian strikes on US positions in Jordan, northern Iraq, Kuwait and the Emirates, saying Tehran responded more extensively than it had previously.One of the most significant developments, in his telling, came when Iran “took the initiative” by firing two missiles. He also cited the targeting of secret US bases in Jordan and northern Iraq, including one that General Rezaei reportedly said lacked air defenses because its operators believed Iran would not be able to locate it.Iran’s Fars News Agency revealed that Iran's recent strike on Camp Titin in southern Jordan dealt a major dual intelligence and operational blow to US forces in the region. According to Fars, Washington had covertly redeployed military personnel and hardware to the southern… pic.twitter.com/tUrmQLlIvi— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) September 5, 2026“So the Iranians have said before that they have many cards up their sleeves, and one by one these are being revealed to all of us,” he stated.The same pattern, Marandi said, is visible in Iran’s growing use of missiles, drones, intelligence capabilities and anti-ship weapons. The country is not merely responding to attacks but increasingly determining the pace and scale of its own military actions.His comparison of attacks on shipping was intended to illustrate that point. After the US struck three Iranian tankers, Iran struck six ships, including three tankers, which Marandi stressed was evidence of “escalation dominance” and growing confidence.The withdrawal of US naval forces from positions closer to Iran would, in his assessment, make any future assault considerably more difficult. American ships would have to operate farther away, increasing logistical demands and requiring more frequent refueling.Iranian pressure on US bases around the Persian Gulf has already complicated Washington’s military logistics, Marandi maintained. The more difficult it becomes for US forces to operate near Iran, the more complicated any attempt to strike the country or control the Strait of Hormuz becomes.US military assumptions about Iran have failedAt the beginning of the US aggression, Marandi recalled, American officials claimed Iran had only a limited number of missiles and drones and would soon exhaust its stockpiles.More than six months later, he argued, the battlefield picture looks very different.According to the Iranian professor, when Washington launched another major attack, Iran’s response was broader than previous retaliatory operations. The strikes against US positions across the region were presented as proof that Iran retains the capacity to sustain military operations despite prolonged US pressure.That resilience, he said, is not limited to the military sphere.US sanctions, airstrikes and the economic siege have undoubtedly made life more difficult for Iranians. Inflation remains high, some jobs have disappeared, and economic conditions have deteriorated. Yet, he rejected the idea that Iran has been pushed to the point of collapse.He illustrated Tehran as a functioning city, with restaurants operating, shops open and public transportation continuing to run. While acknowledging that business owners would describe conditions as substantially harder than before, he said basic supplies remain available, and key goods are subsidized by the government.Regardless, the more important factor is the population’s endurance after months of missile attacks, airstrikes and economic pressure, he said.Tehran rejects renegotiation of the MOUThat resilience also informs Iran’s position on diplomacy. Marandi said Tehran is prepared to implement the memorandum of understanding, but will not agree to renegotiate it.The reason, he explained, is that renegotiation would allow Washington to avoid existing obligations and repeat the same behavior that led to the breakdown in trust.Before the 12-day war, the US and Iran had already held five rounds of negotiations and were preparing for a sixth when Washington launched its attack. Marandi viewed subsequent US admissions as evidence that the negotiations had been little more than a façade.He made a similar assessment of earlier Oman-mediated negotiations, arguing that Washington had not approached diplomacy in good faith.Speaking on Sunday’s episode of The Grand Standoff: Iran and the World, Professor Mohammad Marandi said Iran is prepared to implement the MoU, which he described as the only agreement acceptable to Tehran.He said Iran will not renegotiate the MoU, arguing that any renegotiation… pic.twitter.com/J32WD9khjL— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) September 7, 2026The experience has left Iran deeply skeptical of US commitments. Marandi described Washington as completely untrustworthy and maintained that Tehran will insist on the implementation of the existing MOU before normalizing the situation around the Strait of Hormuz.The agreement, in his account, also extends beyond Iran itself. Lebanon is part of the arrangement, with an end to the occupation of Lebanon and the killing of Lebanese civilians presented as a fundamental provision. Gaza, he added, cannot be excluded from the agreement under any circumstances.“That ceasefire agreement, which included Lebanon, was violated by Netanyahu, who carpet-bombed your country. So the Americans and then Trump sided with Netanyahu. So we know that the United States is completely untrustworthy.”Iran remains open to negotiations over implementation, Marandi said, but the immediate priority has shifted toward the “time for resistance” and “offensive actions” against the US.Iran Strikes 3 US-Linked Vessels, 3 Trespassing Oil Tankers in Retaliation for US attacksIran’s resilience extends beyond the battlefieldMarandi also placed Iran’s military resilience within a broader political context, contrasting Tehran’s response to US pressure with the behavior of other governments that have faced Washington.He cited the case of Turkey and President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, recalling how Ankara eventually handed over a detained US pastor after Washington imposed sanctions and threatened further economic measures.Iran, by contrast, has continued resisting pressure from the US and its allies despite the scale of the campaign against it, reflecting a broader culture of resilience within Iranian society.He also questioned the credibility of US claims regarding civilian casualties. Referring to the US bombing of a school in Minab, he criticized Washington for blaming Iran while US War Secretary Pete Hegseth said an investigation was underway.Six months later, Marandi asked: where are the results of that investigation?“What are the results? No, the Americans are not like the Israelis. They’re genocidal maniacs. And let me give you an interesting experience of my own.”Marandi contrasted Iranian and US military conduct by pointing to casualty estimates generated by artificial intelligence systems. He said he used Kimi and DeepSeek to ask how many civilians had been killed by Iranian missiles and drones in Arab countries during the preceding six months.Kimi reportedly returned a figure of 41 civilian deaths, while DeepSeek produced a figure below 20. Marandi said that even assuming the higher figure was correct, every civilian death would remain tragic.The figure, he said, was extremely low compared with the casualties he attributes to US attacks, including the Minab school strike, which killed more than four times as many people, most of them elementary school children and women workers.He extended the same criticism to Western governments and media organizations, accusing them of failing to condemn attacks on civilian targets, including weddings, bridges, schools, hospitals and sports centers.Iran presents military capabilities as indigenousTurning to Iran’s military capabilities, Marandi said the broader significance of Iran’s military performance is that Tehran has achieved it without relying on Russia or China for its core defense capabilities.Iran’s military capabilities are indigenous, he maintained, and are being demonstrated incrementally.Russia and China, meanwhile, remain important strategic partners. Marandi described Iranian-Russian relations as “excellent” and referred positively to a recent meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.Yet he rejected the idea that Moscow or Beijing are responsible for Iran’s ability to withstand US aggression.Iran is self-reliant, he emphasized, while simultaneously seeking strong relations with countries willing to maintain mutually beneficial ties.The same logic, Marandi maintained, applies to Russia. Moscow has no reason to trust Washington, particularly after repeated US reversals and broken commitments. He pointed to the meeting between Putin and US President Donald Trump in Alaska as another example of Washington failing to honor commitments.The resulting distrust extends to China as well. Beijing and Moscow, he argued, have both been “stabbed in the back” before and therefore have little reason to accept US assurances at face value.Why China needs a strong IranThe relationship between Iran and China, Marandi argued, rests on more than short-term political calculations.The Silk Road has connected the two civilizations for thousands of years through land and maritime routes, while Iran and China have never fought a war against one another. That historical relationship, in his view, provides a foundation for closer strategic ties.Energy is another major factor.Marandi pointed to the US role in controlling energy resources and argued that China has good reason to oppose attempts by Washington to dominate global energy markets. Iran possesses the world’s second-largest natural gas reserves and third-largest oil reserves, according to figures cited by Marandi, while Iran and Afghanistan also possess substantial mineral resources.For Beijing, an independent Iran represents access to energy and a major geographic link between China and West Asia.Iran is also important to the Belt and Road Initiative, Marandi maintained, because its territory connects China with West Asia and provides a strategic anchor linking the West, South and Central Asian regions.He described Iran as an “anchor of stability” across these areas and highlighted Tehran’s role in confronting extremist groups that he accused the US and NATO of having supported or exploited in the region.China therefore has numerous reasons to maintain a strong relationship with Iran, while Tehran likewise benefits from a stable and powerful China and wants to deepen productive relations with Beijing.Marandi warns of wider consequences if US aggression continuesLooking ahead, Marandi expects further confrontation if Washington continues trying to pressure Iran economically and militarily.The US, he argued, will attempt to “strangle” the Iranian economy, while Tehran will not accept that strategy passively. Any new escalation could therefore be met with a rapid and disproportionate Iranian response.Iran, he stressed, will not necessarily respond on a tit-for-tat basis. Instead, its response will be designed to impose a significantly higher cost on the US and its regional partners.Marandi pointed again to Iran’s strikes against US naval assets and secret military bases in Jordan and northern Iraq, alongside the response to attacks on Iranian tankers, as evidence that Tehran has already adopted this approach.The consequences could extend well beyond the immediate battlefield. A sustained confrontation over the Strait of Hormuz would have implications for Arab countries that support Washington as well as for global energy markets.Marandi believes Iran is prepared for that escalation and has no intention of backing down.The central question, in his view, is whether Washington will change course. If the Trump administration does not step back, he warned, US aggression against Iran is likely to intensify, with consequences that could become increasingly difficult for the region and the global economy to contain. (Al Mayadeen)