Israel-US and Iran War: A geostrategic transformation
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
After the 12-day war in May last year, it was clear that both sides would be face-to-face soon. They restarted on 28th February 2026. Israel-US adopted the same pattern of targeting the top brass, including the Grand Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, on the very first day, thinking that in the absence of these officials, the Iranian administration would be like a rudderless ship. This would create confusion and provide an easy opportunity for regime change.
Thirteen days have passed, yet there are no visible signs of either the fall of the regime or a pause or ceasefire. Despite US-Israel’s anguish, Iran selected Mojtaba Khamenei as the new supreme leader – an act of defiance.
Both sides continue to bombard each other’s vital infrastructure, including civilian and military targets. Energy installations such as oil depots and refineries have become primary targets. Under a tit-for-tat policy, Iran has also declared that financial centers, banks, and offices of major technology companies such as Google, YouTube, and Microsoft could be the next targets. Already 26 US bases have been targeted. Following the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the conflict rapidly expanded from a limited confrontation into a regional war, and with the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, its effects are now visible in the global economy and in the daily lives of ordinary people. Approximately 130 oil ships are anchored, stopping 20% oil which passes through the narrow strait of 33 km. Already four ships were targeted which tried to bypass the warning.
Among the GCC countries, the UAE faced the highest number of attacks.
Iran’s aggressive response and selection of Mojtaba, a hardliner, as Ayatollah, appear to indicate that Iran is prepared for a prolonged conflict, whereas the United States and Israel seem eager to conclude the war quickly. Meanwhile, President Trump’s plan to send Kurdish Peshmerga into Iran via Iraq seems like another disaster.
READ: Trump says US ‘ahead of schedule’ in Iran war, claims most missiles destroyed
Tehran had been closely and patiently observing military buildups in the Indian Ocean, the Gulf of Oman, and the Mediterranean Sea for several weeks. The United States mobilized a substantial part of its defence capabilities, including naval armadas and two aircraft carriers, Abraham Lincoln and Gerald Ford. Hundreds of fifth-generation stealth fighter jets were deployed along with advanced air-defence systems such as THAAD and large stockpiles of interceptors.
In addition, the United States strengthened its military presence across several bases in the Gulf region, including Qatar, Bahrain, Oman, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Iraq.
Israel also appeared determined to launch what it described as a “fight-to-the-finish” war with the Islamic Republic. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu repeatedly stated that he had been waiting for such a war for nearly forty years. Iran, on the other hand, has long maintained that it began preparing for such a scenario after the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq and the fall of Saddam Hussein.
The earlier conflict in May had already revealed the strengths and weaknesses of both sides. However, the current course of the war suggests that the US–Israel alliance underestimated Iran’s military capabilities, particularly its missile and drone systems, careful planning, and effective use of its military resources.
Compared with the US–Israel alliance, Tehran appears to possess a clearer understanding of its adversaries’ strengths, limitations, and operational constraints.
Iran was also aware of its own limitations. Its air force cannot match the capabilities of US and Israeli fighter jets, and its airspace remains vulnerable to aerial attacks. As the conflict expanded, these vulnerabilities became evident. At the same time, the United States and Israel appeared to have an incomplete assessment of Iran’s capabilities. Although they possessed precise intelligence about the locations of Iranian leaders and senior officials—they killed several commanders and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei-they appeared to lack detailed knowledge of Iran’s missile infrastructure, drone networks, and underground silos developed over several decades.
It also appears that the US–Israel side underestimated the possibility of indirect assistance from Russia and China, relying heavily instead on air superiority and defensive shield systems.
Iran’s war strategy
A detailed military assessment would require expert analysis, but developments in the conflict suggest that Iran followed a three-stage strategy.
First, Iran responded to the US-Israel attacks by deploying large numbers of drones, many reportedly stored since 2011 and 2013. These drones forced US–Israel defence systems to respond with expensive interceptors. In financial terms, this created an asymmetric dynamic: Iranian drones costing between $20,000 and $50,000 were intercepted by missiles costing between $1 million and $2 million. As the wave of drone attacks continued, interceptor stocks began to decline, gradually exposing the airspace of US bases and Israel to greater risk.
Second, once defensive systems were strained, Iran launched more advanced missiles targeting radar installations, communication centres, satellites, and data facilities. Reports indicate damage to communication and data infrastructure at the Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar and at military installations in Bahrain. Such attacks disrupted surveillance and communication systems that coordinate missile defence networks such as THAAD, David’s Sling, Arrow, and Iron Dome. Command and monitoring centres that once gathered and transmitted military data across thousands of kilometres became severely limited in their operations.
Third,
Iran escalated its attacks using hypersonic missiles while adopting a tit-for-tat strategy. These strikes targeted refineries, military bases, and strategic infrastructure in Israel. Some reports suggest the use of the Khorramshahr-1 missile equipped with submunitions capable of dispersing dozens of warheads over a wide area, complicating interception efforts.
Meanwhile, attacks on naval assets reportedly forced aircraft carriers operating in the Gulf of Oman to reposition farther from the Iranian coastline.
READ: Two weeks in, Iran strikes inflict nearly $4B in US military losses
Hormuz blockade and its impact
After weakening regional defence systems, Iran announced a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. This strait is one of the world’s most critical energy corridors, through which roughly 20 percent of global crude oil and a similar share of liquefied natural gas passes.
At present, around 130 oil tankers are reportedly anchored in the strait. Iran claims effective control over the Hormuz chokepoint.
It has targeted four vessels, including one linked to India, that attempted to pass through. Iran has reportedly deployed underwater tunnels and small, agile boats to intercept or attack ships that violate the blockade.
At the same time, attacks on energy facilities in Saudi Arabia and the temporary closure of Qatar’s Ras Laffan gas facilities disrupted global energy supplies. As a result, gas prices in Europe rose sharply while crude oil prices increased from about $62 per barrel to more than $100. Some analysts warn that if the conflict continues, oil prices could rise further, potentially reaching $200 per barrel. Such developments could trigger inflation, supply-chain disruptions, and rising unemployment worldwide.
Future of the War
Iran appears determined to pursue its objectives and may not halt operations even if a ceasefire is proposed by the United States or Israel. The selection of Mojtaba Khamenei as the new supreme authority signals continuity of leadership, consolidation of political control, and a claim of legitimacy within the existing system.
Large public gatherings during funeral processions and demonstrations suggest that, at least during wartime, sections of the population have rallied around the leadership.
Reports have also mentioned proposals to deploy Kurdish Peshmerga forces into Iran through Iraq. However, the region’s history suggests that such operations would face significant geographical and logistical difficulties. During the Iran–Iraq War, Saddam Hussein also attempted to advance through the mountainous terrain of the Zagros region but faced serious constraints.
Some Iranian sources have claimed the capture of US special forces personnel and the killing of several Israeli officials during the conflict, although many of these claims remain difficult to verify independently.
Chances of a Ceasefire
Iranian authorities have reportedly outlined three conditions for a ceasefire. First, all military attacks by the United States and Israel must stop immediately. Second, Tehran seeks assurances that such attacks will not be repeated in the future. Third, Iran demands recognition of its sovereignty and compensation for damages caused during the conflict. These conditions are not easy. Who will ensure that the U.S. and Israel would not attack in the future? Second, who will pay the reconstruction cost, etc.? It is true that regional problems can be resolved only when the issue of Palestine is resolved in a fair and just manner. Lebanon and Yemen, Syria also need attention.
Future Trajectory-Palestine solution is the only solution
Even if the present war stops, regional stability will remain uncertain. Long-standing political and security disputes remain unresolved. Israel is unlikely to abandon its strategic objectives, Greater Israel, while tensions involving Hezbollah and Hamas are likely to persist. The United States may also increase pressure on Gulf states to revise their security arrangements so that regional partners become more directly involved in future conflicts.
Implications for India
For India, energy security remains a major concern. Disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz could affect oil supplies and trade routes. Approximately 50% oil passes through the route, while Houthis are there to choke off the Red Sea navigation.
India must also prepare contingency plans for the evacuation of its 9 million workers from the region and strengthen logistical arrangements to safeguard trade and shipping routes in the event of prolonged instability. Chemical fertilizers are another major concern for India. The region provides the bulk of fertilizers and ensures food security. Disruption in supply line has significantly affected the supply of fresh vegetables, perishable items including agriproducts , poultry and meat products
In the long term, India is to sign a long term energy agreement with the US. At the same time, India needs a more coherent West Asia policy and must avoid being drawn into the region’s strategic conflicts. The region is sensitive as well as vital to India’s economy and geostrategy. India needs a careful policy.
OPINION: Iran is not Venezuela: Gen-Z would fail to defeat diehard ayatollahs
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
- The Four Drivers of the Iran War: Rhetoric, Miscalculation, Hubris, and Two Conflicting Clocks
- Israeli prime minister’s office refutes reports suggesting Netanyahu assassinated
- Israel says 3,138 people injured since war with Iran, Lebanon began
- War, Oil and Power: Could the Iran Conflict Shake the Petrodollar Order?
- The Economics Behind Wars
- Lebanon says 26 paramedics killed, 51 injured in Israeli attacks since March 2
- Rocket attack targets US Embassy in Baghdad, damages defense system
- B-2 stealth bombers used in operation against Iran: US Central Command
- US offers up to $10M reward for information on Iranian leaders
- Most humanitarian aid movements through Gaza crossing denied over past 2 days, UN says
- Israel-US and Iran War: A geostrategic transformation
