"I expect that, given the stated goals, including the political change of the regime, this is likely to drag on over time. In order to realize such a goal, sustained and consistent actions are needed, which cannot happen quickly", said international analyst Martin Tabakov on Nova TV.
He explained that regime change cannot be achieved solely through military strikes from a distance, but requires internal processes within Iran itself that support such a development.
According to him, there is also a significant difference between the positions of Israel and the United States. According to Tabakov, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has an interest in prolonging the conflict, US President Donald Trump will likely seek to end it at the earliest opportunity to avoid prolonged military engagement and casualties.
Tabakov noted that despite the strikes on key targets and figures, including the top leadership, Iran continues to retain its ability to retaliate.
"Indications are that these strikes have not led to a collapse in the regime's ability to function. Tehran continues to launch missiles and exercise control over its military structures," he pointed out.
According to him, the real decisions are currently being made by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and influential figures close to the supreme leadership, which guarantees the institutional stability of the regime.
Tabakov also explained that the operation against the supreme leader required complex coordination and the use of various intelligence methods - satellite surveillance, interception of communications and confirmation from a source on the ground.
"The most important element in such operations is the presence of a person on the ground who can confirm the location of the target. This is key to verifying the information," he stressed.
According to Tabakov, Iran has no realistic chance of winning a direct military conflict with the United States, but it can achieve another form of success.
"The only realistic victory for Tehran is the survival of the regime and the increase in the price that the United States must pay - both militarily and politically and economically", he explained.
In his words, this is precisely what explains Iran's strategy of carrying out limited but constant strikes, instead of a massive attack that would quickly exhaust its military resources.
After him, Dimitar Katserkov took the floor, commenting on the internal stability of the Iranian regime and the possibility of internal turmoil.
"At this stage, there are no categorical indications that the regime has lost control of the country. Despite the strikes and the elimination of key figures, the military structures continue to function," he said.
Katserkov noted that although there has been serious discontent and protests in Iran in recent years, this does not automatically mean that the regime will collapse.
"About 20% of the population continues to support the regime - Russia and China do not intervene directly - whether for ideological reasons or due to dependence on the state. This is a sufficient basis for maintaining power," the expert pointed out.
Both analysts emphasized that the lack of direct intervention by Russia and China, despite their strategic relations with Iran, is striking.
According to them, this shows that none of these countries is ready to risk a direct military conflict with the United States in defense of Tehran.
At the same time, the conflict may have indirect economic benefits for Russia if it leads to an increase in oil prices.
Katserkov emphasized that it is important to monitor whether Arab countries will become more actively involved, especially after the attacks on targets in the region and American bases.
"For countries such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, a weakened Iran is preferable to a chaotic Iran that could destabilize the entire region," he explained.
Regarding Europe, experts noted that the risk of a mass refugee wave from Iran remains limited.
"Iran is a different case. A large part of the population does not want to leave the country, but rather to change the system from within," said Katserkov.
In conclusion, the two analysts were categorical that the main question is not whether Iran can win the conflict, but whether the regime will be able to survive.
According to them, the outcome will depend on a combination of military pressure, domestic political stability and international reaction in the coming weeks and months.