'Profound strategic misjudgment': Why Iran might have the upper hand in war with US

The outcome of the US and Israel war against Iran looks likely to come down to a test of wills, a local expert says, with Iran appearing unlikely to be the first to blink.

Robert Patman, professor of international relations at the University of Otago, told Morning Report on Monday it was a "precarious situation" in which both sides wanted an agreement that would stop the fighting, but on incompatible terms.

"Both sides are trying to, if you like, affect the understanding of the memorandum of understanding, the document that has dictated the ceasefire talks. They're trying to shape that in a direction which will give them a settlement on their own terms."

He said the memorandum between the two sides included a requirement for Iran to "make its best efforts to… ensure the free passage of commercial traffic" through the Strait of Hormuz.

"The Iranians have interpreted that as giving them leverage over the Strait of Hormuz, and they believe that was a recognition by the United States," Patman explained.

"The United States disagrees, I think much of the international community disagrees with that interpretation, but the Iranians take the view that we're not going back to the status quo. They take the view they were illegally attacked by the United States. That resulted in them asserting themselves over the Strait of Hormuz and also, as we've seen, retaliating against the Gulf States.

"But they're not going to give up what they see as the leverage they obtained as a result of being attacked by the United States and Israel."

While the US could "apply ever greater amounts of military power", Patman said its track record using such strategy was "not promising".

"It was the very thing which gave the Iranians leverage over the Strait of Hormuz and enabled them to attack US bases in Gulf states. So applying more of the same doesn't look like it's going to bring the Iranians to heel. And the Iranians believe time is on their side."

Patman said despite its power - particularly over the UN Security Council - the US made a "profound strategic misjudgment" in attacking Iran, and should not expect any agreement which ends the war to be "optimal".

"At the outset, it expected the conflict would be over within four to five days. The regime would collapse. and Iran could be reshaped perhaps on a democratic basis. If anything, that attack has empowered and resuscitated the regime in Iran. And there's little sign that hardline elements within Iran are going to back down in the near future."