Both sides are aware of the broader strategic picture.
Trump knows Iran is militarily weaker than it was before last summer’s 12-day war, and Tehran is aware that he has little appetite for a full-scale, open-ended conflict.
That mutual awareness may provide some reassurance, but it could also create dangerous misperceptions, with each side potentially overestimating its leverage or misreading the opponent’s intentions.
For Trump, finding a balance, whatever that might be, is crucial. He needs an outcome he can present as a victory, without tipping Iran into either a renewed cycle of repression or a descent into chaos.
For Iranian leaders, the danger lies in timing and perception. Iran’s previous model of delayed, symbolic retaliation may no longer be sufficient if leaders believe speed is essential to reassert deterrence on the outside and control inside of the country that was shaken by the scale of the recent unrests.
Yet, a rapid response would sharply increase the risk of miscalculation, drawing regional actors into a conflict few can afford.
With both sides under intense pressure and little room to manoeuvre, a long-running game of brinkmanship may be approaching its most dangerous moment, one in which the cost of getting the balance wrong would be borne not only by governments, but by millions of ordinary Iranians and the wider region beyond.