On 28 February 2026, the conflict between Israel and Iran, which began on 7 October 2023, entered a new and far more dangerous phase. The United States and Israel launched coordinated airstrikes on Iran, targeting its military bases, nuclear facilities, and, most significantly, its senior leadership. During these strikes, Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, was killed.

Iran responded immediately with missile and drone attacks on Israel and US bases in the Gulf region. Several US bases were severely damaged, and despite the presence of advanced air defense systems such as the Iron Dome, Israel also suffered significant impacts. On 4 March 2026, Hezbollah joined the conflict, launching rocket attacks from Lebanon into Israel, prompting heavy Israeli retaliation in southern Lebanon.

The conflict rapidly expanded across the region, with attacks reported in Jordan, Qatar, Kuwait, and Iraq. Shipping disruptions began in the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz, a route responsible for nearly 20% of global oil supply. Iran further escalated the situation by targeting civilian infrastructure across the Gulf, including ships, airports, oil refineries, and desalination plants. As the war enters its fourth week, it continues with full intensity from both sides.

Israel has achieved some success in weakening Iran’s leadership by eliminating several senior figures who were strongly opposed to Israel’s existence and who supported proxy groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah operating in Gaza and Lebanon. Israel’s primary concern remains Iran’s potential acquisition of nuclear weapons, which it views as an existential threat. From Israel’s perspective, this war is fundamentally about national survival.

Historically, Iran and Israel did not have direct hostility prior to the 1979 Islamic Revolution led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Since then, ideological and geopolitical tensions have escalated. It can be argued that Iran’s religious leadership has used opposition to Israel as a means to consolidate domestic legitimacy and assert leadership in the Islamic world. However, it remains unclear whether the broader Iranian population fully supports these views.

From a strategic standpoint, Israel’s long-term objective appears to be the dismantling of Iran’s current power structure and the establishment of a more democratic and republican system, potentially with support from the United States, along with the elimination of Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

For the United States, the situation is increasingly complex. It appears to have been drawn deeper into the conflict, despite having no immediate existential threat from Iran. Exiting the war without reputational damage is becoming increasingly difficult. While there may be perceived strategic gains, such as influence over Iran’s energy resources, the financial and military costs are substantial. The Pentagon has reportedly sought an additional $200 billion to sustain the war effort.

Moreover, the United States has suffered setbacks, including damage to its military infrastructure in the Gulf and a potential loss of credibility as a security guarantor in the region. Traditional allies, including members of NATO, have shown limited support for US actions. Moreover, Pakistan is also not coming openly in support with the US against Iran.  This situation may prompt Gulf nations to reconsider their security arrangements, potentially leading to a new regional security architecture. Such a shift would significantly impact US global influence.

In an extreme scenario, there is also concern that the United States might consider escalatory measures, including the use of nuclear weapons, to preserve its strategic dominance.

For Iran, retaliation was almost inevitable following the initial strikes by the US and Israel. While it has responded forcefully, its military resources are limited. Iran may seek support from countries such as Russia and China; however, Russia’s ongoing involvement in the Ukraine conflict limits its capacity to assist, leaving China as the more likely supplier of military hardware.

A particularly dangerous scenario would arise if advanced weapons systems, such as intercontinental ballistic missiles, were supplied to Iran, or if nuclear capabilities were extended through Pakistan. Meanwhile, Iran has already demonstrated its ability to disrupt global energy markets by targeting infrastructure and exerting control over the Strait of Hormuz. If the conflict continues, the resulting energy crisis could intensify, with many countries likely attributing responsibility to both the United States and Israel. In this regard, Iran’s strategy may succeed in weakening US alliances, although the United States could partially offset this through its position as a net energy exporter.

The continuation of this conflict poses a serious risk of global economic disruption and could potentially trigger a widespread economic downturn. Therefore, it is in the interest of the international community to prioritize de-escalation through dialogue and diplomacy.