This working preprint applies the Adaptive Policy Coherence Framework (APCF) to the February 2026 United States–Israeli airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military facilities. The objective is methodological rather than prescriptive. The paper demonstrates how layered structural analysis can be applied to high-intensity interstate events without collapsing into binary geopolitical narratives. APCF is a governance-grade analytic scaffold designed to prevent interpretive conflation in complex policy systems. It separates analysis into five independent layers: policy intent, evidence landscape, institutional reality, behavioral adaptation, and outcome divergence. By enforcing layer separation, traceability of claims, and non-prescriptive synthesis, the framework enables structured mapping of alignment, fragility, and uncertainty across interacting institutions. The case examined involves public reporting of U.S.–Israeli military strikes targeting Iranian nuclear infrastructure, subsequent institutional responses, and parallel diplomatic and security signaling. Rather than adjudicating legality, morality, or strategic correctness, the paper maps divergence domains between stated objectives (e.g., deterrence, non-proliferation, regional stabilization) and observable system signals (e.g., escalation risk, deterrence messaging, institutional responses, international legal frameworks). The contribution of this work is procedural. It provides a structured analytic approach for examining contested geopolitical events under conditions of uncertainty, political polarization, and multi-institutional layering. The framework is transferable to other domains characterized by scale discordance, adaptive behavior, and heterogeneous evidence streams. This draft is circulated for methodological discussion and structural critique. It is not intended as a policy position.
Wilson et al. (Sun,) studied this question.