Iran has deployed Kheibar Shekan missiles in recent strikes against US assets across the Middle East, breaching American air defenses despite interception efforts and forcing the White House to weigh the strategic cost of a prolonged conflict that could exhaust interceptor stockpiles.
The Kheibar Shekan missiles are solid-fuel, medium-range weapons with a range of at least 1,400 kilometers. They're described as cheap, mobile and accurate. Unlike older Iranian missiles, they don't require prelaunch fueling. They can be kept fueled and loaded quickly into trucks or other vehicles for launching, which makes it easier to evade US and Israeli warplanes seeking to knock out Iranian missile launch sites. The Wall Street Journal cited US officials as saying Iran has used the missiles in recent strikes, and one US official said some have gotten through even though the US and its allies have shot down most of them throughout the war. The officials said Iran has been using different flight paths, maneuvers and speeds to confuse US defenses.
The Tactical Edge
The missiles are harder to destroy than other missiles because they have higher maneuverability. Some variants have small engines in the nose section that carry the explosive warhead and detach during the final phase of flight, allowing the missile to adjust direction as it approaches its target at about 10,000 kilometers per hour. Iran is combining Kheibar Shekan launches with high-speed attack drones and less sophisticated missiles, targeting radars supporting air defenses across the region and housing areas for US troops at bases across the Middle East, US officials told the Wall Street Journal.
Army Gen. Joseph Votel, who has led US Central Command, said, "I think what it tells us is Iran is paying attention, and they're learning, and they're looking at ways that they can get at us." He added: "This is a military that has a well-developed drone capability; it's had a missile program, a rocket program for a long period of time. They've got a lot of expertise in this area."
Fabian Hinz, an independent missile expert, said Iran may be assembling more missiles from components in underground bases, though the production facilities where the missile engines were built have been destroyed. He said Iran likely studied previous launches in order to maximize their chances of their missiles reaching their targets. Hinz also said, "Iran has seen what types of maneuvers are the most effective ones for overcoming missile defense. Every single combat use gives you some sort of data, so that's very useful for the Iranians."
The Cost Asymmetry
Analysts told the Wall Street Journal that Kheibar Shekans are far cheaper than US and Israeli interceptors used to stop them, at a cost between $2 million and $15 million depending on the system. Israel said it shot most of the Kheibar Shekans fired at it by Iran, which claimed it targeted the office of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as well as another attack with the missiles last month.
Trump decided not to escalate the conflict with Iran, US officials told The New York Times on Saturday, because he feared an extended war could deplete interceptor stockpiles. The officials said recent White House discussions have centered on the depletion of the US's interceptor missiles, particularly since three US soldiers were killed in Jordan after an Iranian missile got through American air defenses. US General Dan Caine said, according to the New York Times' sources, that a return to full-fledged war with Iran was doable, but would severely reduce the amount of missiles available to US Central Command in the Middle East.
Diplomacy Over the Strait
Iran and Oman have made "some progress" over navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, though it remains unclear whether Iran will accept the proposal currently on the table, two sources familiar with the matter told The Jerusalem Post. One source said Oman has proposed establishing a regional consortium that would oversee maritime security, search-and-rescue operations and other forms of regional cooperation. The source said, "The key point is that participation and payments would be voluntary."
According to the source, Iran has so far opposed the idea, insisting instead on mandatory payments, arguing that vessels would otherwise be barred from transiting the strait. Earlier on Sunday, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei confirmed that several rounds of talks took place between the deputy ministers of Foreign Affairs in Tehran. He said the discussions focused on exchanging views on common principles and operational mechanisms for managing safe shipping traffic in the Strait of Hormuz while respecting the sovereign rights of both coastal states. Baghaei said the talks were productive and progress was made, adding that the Omani delegation left Tehran on Saturday evening, but technical and political consultations between the two sides have continued.
Trump's Calculus
White House communications director Steven Cheung told the New York Times that Trump has been "consistent in saying he prefers a diplomatic solution, but he continues to retain all options if Iran continues terrorist activities in the Straight of Hormuz or against allies." Cheung added that "it would be wise for Iran to work towards a negotiated deal; otherwise, they know what will happen." One anonymous senior US official said a return to major operations against Iran would not drive them back towards negotiations, while other sources said the strikes would have the opposite effect, giving the Iranian leadership an external threat to focus on and rally against.
Earlier on Saturday, sources familiar with the administration's decision-making process told The Jerusalem Post that Trump has not yet made a final decision on whether to launch a major strike against Iran. Trump said on Friday that the United States is continuing diplomatic talks with Tehran while keeping the military option fully prepared. "We're locked and loaded," Trump said, adding that Washington could escalate its military campaign "to a much higher level" if necessary, but that his preferred option remains a negotiated agreement.
Why This Matters:
The strategic dilemma facing Washington reveals the asymmetric warfare challenge Iran has mastered: cheap, mobile missiles that force the US and its allies to expend interceptors costing millions more per shot. Iran's ability to penetrate air defenses, even partially, demonstrates that technological superiority doesn't guarantee battlefield dominance when an adversary learns and adapts. The depletion of interceptor stockpiles isn't just a logistical concern — it's a constraint on American freedom of action across the Middle East, limiting Washington's ability to defend allies and deter aggression. Iran's insistence on mandatory payments for Strait of Hormuz passage shows Tehran leveraging geography for economic coercion, turning a global chokepoint into a revenue stream. The White House's reluctance to escalate reflects a sober calculation: a prolonged conflict could leave US forces vulnerable elsewhere while strengthening Iran's domestic position. Trump's diplomatic preference may reflect strategic caution rather than weakness, but it also signals to Tehran that missile strikes carry limited consequences as long as they don't cross undefined red lines.