With the US and Iran back at war following a prolonged but shaky truce, the latest US strikes seem to be less focused on Iran's coastal installations and maritime targets in the Strait of Hormuz.

Iranian media and local officials have reported strikes on bridges, tunnels, roads, rail infrastructure, power facilities and desalination plants in southern Iran over the past week.

Hormozgan province, just north of the Strait of Hormuz, has been hit especially hard.

According to Iranian media, six bridges in Khamir county were struck early on Friday, July 17.

Hours later, more reports followed of attacks on two tunnels and two more bridges in Hormozgan. At least eight people were reported killed in the bridge strikes.

US campaign aimed at mobility and recovery

The US military also appears to have conducted the strikes in a very deliberate pattern. In the first wave, bridges west and north of provincial capital Bandar Abbas were hit.

In a second wave, another bridge to the east, one to the north and two tunnels north of the city were damaged. Alongside that, part of the railway west of Bandar Abbas was also struck.

Shukria Bradoost, an international security analyst at Virginia Tech in the US, told DW that the main US objective remains the same as before.

"The American goal in attacking southern Iran is to reopen the Strait of Hormuz," she said.

However, she noted that Washington is trying to do more than remove direct military threats to shipping.

The US military is destroying the infrastructure that could help Iran rebuild, reposition or sustain military pressure in the area, she added, noting that this was the reason that bridges, roads and rail lines have become targets.

She also warned that Washington could move to take control the strategic Kharg Island, the home of Iran's main oil export terminal, in its push to remove the wider threat to Hormuz.

Can US cripple Kharg Island without destroying it?

The US has so far refrained from targeting energy facilities on the island, home to Iran's main oil export terminal, said Ahmad Vakhshiteh, director of the Moscow-based Center for Strategic Research on Developing Relations with the Middle East.

"Naturally, the island is valuable as long as its oil facilities remain operational and undamaged," he told DW.

"But the key question is whether the United States is seeking to seize Kharg militarily or whether, through repeated attacks, it is pursuing what could be described as a political seizure of the island," he said.

"In other words, rather than deploying ground forces, it could continue nightly attacks on Kharg and other parts of southern Iran to create a public perception that southern Iran has fallen or that its energy infrastructure can no longer operate," Vakhshiteh added, saying that this could then increase public pressure on the Iranian leaders.

"One possible scenario is that, if Iran does not show flexibility in negotiations with the United States, Washington could increase pressure on Kharg Island in an attempt to reduce Iranian oil exports to near zero," Vakhshiteh,

However, the Russia-based analyst pointed out that this kind of move would cause a major shock to global energy markets, which could also have serious consequences for the United States and for US President Donald Trump.

"Overall, however, I do not believe the United States will make the miscalculation of deploying its soldiers to Kharg Island. Doing so would draw it into a war of attrition, requiring enormous resources to hold the island before ultimately forcing it to withdraw," he added.

Washington is upping the cost of war

While Washington and Tehran were able to hammer out a memorandum of understanding in June, Iranian officials have ramped up their rhetoric since the burial of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei two weeks ago.

This includes increasingly common references to revenge, Bradoost said, adding that this signals an intensified ideological imperative of confrontation, thereby making compromise harder.

Iran is also trying to widen the energy crisis and shift the costs of war onto others so that the conflict becomes too expensive to sustain.

In turn, Washington seems increasingly focused on gradually wearing down Tehran's ability to project power, from Iran's naval and logistical capacity to its ability to use energy exports and the Strait of Hormuz as leverage.

Game of political survival

The attacks on Iran's infrastructure in Hormozgan reflect a broader contest over the next phase of the war.

Every collapsed bridge and tunnel affects Iran's ability to move forces towards the Strait of Hormuz, compensate losses and keep pressure on one of the world's most sensitive energy chokepoints.

As long as the war continues, however, the Trump administration will be facing political and economic pressures of its own, limiting the scope of its campaign.

While Tehran faces similar pressures to seek compromise, it also has other considerations.

The Iranian leadership appears to believe that if the threat to oil exports, energy security and the Strait of Hormuz disappears, outside pressure and public displeasure could focus on them, rather than outside enemies.

Seen from this perspective, Iran's strategy becomes less focused on defending territory and more about the regime defending its own political survival.

Edited by: Wesley Rahn