The war, which began on February 28 following joint US-Israeli airstrikes, has rapidly escalated in recent days. Iran has retaliated by targeting US military bases and embassies in Gulf states.

The United States and Israel have launched a large-scale military campaign against Iran, focusing on air, land, and sea strikes since the start of their joint operation five days ago. The offensive is considered one of the most intense campaigns in the region in decades. Seventeen Iranian warships and other naval assets have been destroyed. Thousands of Iranian military sites, including ballistic missile launchers and air defense installations, have been struck. The Israeli operation, dubbed “Lion’s Roar,” aims to weaken Iran’s military capabilities and destabilize its leadership structure.

In the political dimension, Israeli Defense Minister Yisrael Katz issued a stark warning that anyone appointed to lead Iran following the assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei will be considered a target for assassination. Speaking on the social media platform X, Katz emphasized that this includes leaders who continue Khamenei’s policies or pose a threat to Israel, the United States, or other regional countries, adding that the Israeli military has been directed to use “all means” to carry out these operations.

Khamenei’s Assassination: Is the Middle East Heading Toward War

On 28 February 2026, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, was assassinated following a series of Israeli missile strikes around Tehran, carried out by American and Israeli forces targeting senior Iranian officials. Two days later, the Iranian government confirmed that Khamenei had been killed in a joint airstrike operation conducted by the United States and Israel. The operation allegedly relied on strategic location intelligence provided by the Central Intelligence Agency to track several high-ranking Iranian leaders.

During the intelligence collection phase, agencies such as the CIA and military intelligence units within the Israel Defense Forces reportedly used satellite imagery (IMINT), signals intelligence (SIGINT), and human intelligence (HUMINT). AI-powered systems were employed to process vast amounts of satellite data, identifying vehicles, convoys, and changes in infrastructure. Machine learning algorithms analyzed communication metadata, detecting patterns, mapping networks, and identifying anomalies. At this stage, AI functioned primarily as a data-filtering and pattern-recognition tool.

AI was also used for “pattern-of-life” analysis, tracking movement routes, timing habits, and security routines. These systems integrated geospatial data, intercepted signals, and surveillance inputs to generate probabilistic assessments of a target’s location. The United States Department of Defense reportedly applied algorithmic systems to optimize strike parameters, calculating missile trajectories and simulating blast radii for enhanced precision. Satellite imagery suggested that Khamenei’s residence suffered severe damage during the attack.

Following the operation, Israeli sources confirmed Khamenei’s death. U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly acknowledged that he had been killed. The Fars News Agency further reported that Khamenei’s daughter, son-in-law, grandchild, and daughter-in-law had also been killed in the strikes.

According to unnamed U.S. officials, an earlier Israeli assassination plan—proposed during the so-called “Twelve-Day War” on 15 June 2025—had been vetoed by President Trump.

Targeting Khamenei: Symbol and Strategy

The U.S. and Israeli leadership cited one of the main reasons for targeting Khamenei as his symbolic role in what they described as long-standing hostility toward the United States, Israel, and their interests in the Middle East. U.S. President Donald Trump publicly called Khamenei “one of the most evil people in history,” framing his death as a significant blow to Iran’s leadership structure and regional influence.

Khamenei was killed in the first wave of U.S. and Israeli military strikes against Iran. Trump described the operation as “massive and ongoing,” part of a joint U.S.–Israeli effort targeting Iranian leadership, nuclear and missile infrastructure, and key military sites. The offensive, considered one of the most ambitious against Iran in decades, included air and missile strikes aimed at degrading Iran’s military capability and limiting its potential future threats to U.S. allies. The campaign also sought to bring about a change in the country’s leadership.

In response, Iran launched a wave of missile strikes targeting Israel and U.S. allies across the region. The attacks also struck the UAE capital, Abu Dhabi, and Bahrain, home to the U.S. Fifth Fleet.

The operation to remove Iran’s supreme leader was expected to dramatically weaken the country’s leadership structure and potentially trigger political change. By killing the top authority who had led Iran for decades, the strikes were described by some commentators as an attempt to disrupt the pillars of Tehran’s governing establishment.

The Ideological Foundation: The Shiite Project

Iran’s leadership and resilience are deeply rooted in ideology. Its so-called “Shiite project” is based on a messianic and sectarian framework that mobilizes Shiite communities worldwide and, according to observers, targets Sunni populations in both objectives and methods.

Since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, Iran has successfully centralized religious and political leadership over Shiite communities in multiple countries. This structure combines religious authority with political direction, presenting itself as doctrinally authoritative and strategically decisive. In contrast, Sunni-majority countries have lacked a comparable centralized political-religious project, a gap attributed to the long-standing dominance of secular systems that separated religion from governance.

Iran’s system grounds its legitimacy in Twelver Shiite doctrine, including belief in twelve divinely appointed Imams and religious authority tied to that tradition. From this ideological foundation, Iran developed political and military alliances across the region. Within a few decades, Tehran expanded its influence into Arab capitals such as Baghdad, Damascus, Beirut, and Sana’a, using affiliated movements and armed groups. Notable examples include Shiite political parties in Iraq, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and the Houthis (Ansar Allah) in Yemen.

Overall, Iran’s regional strategy can be seen as an ideologically driven revolutionary project that integrates religious doctrine, political mobilization, and transnational networks of allied movements. These structures have enabled Iran to project influence across the Middle East and maintain resilience despite military and political pressures.

Symbolic Impact on Regional Power Dynamics

Khamenei’s assassination could be intended to deliver a symbolic blow to Iran’s position in the region. Israel viewed the removal of Iran’s supreme leader as a way to “kill an era” of Tehran’s influence, which has spanned more than four decades and included support for armed groups and proxy forces across the Middle East. For Israel and its supporters, targeting Khamenei was framed as a challenge to Tehran’s longstanding regional influence, built since the 1979 revolution, including its alliances in Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen, and elsewhere. These networks have significantly shaped regional conflicts and power balances, and removing Iran’s supreme leader is seen by some analysts as an effort to disrupt the regional system Tehran cultivated over decades.

UAE Condemns Iranian Attacks

The United Arab Emirates strongly condemned recent Iranian strikes targeting its territory and that of neighboring countries. The UAE summoned the Iranian ambassador, calling the attacks a blatant violation of sovereignty, a direct threat to national security, and a clear breach of international law. Authorities confirmed that air defense systems successfully intercepted some of the attacks and continue to monitor the situation while urging the public to rely on official sources.

The UAE also condemned Iranian strikes on Oman, describing them as a serious escalation that undermines regional stability and de-escalation efforts. Meanwhile, UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan spoke with U.S. President Donald Trump to discuss the attacks and their implications for regional and international security, coordinating efforts to respond to Iranian aggression.

British Response and Regional Military Activity

In a related development, British forces responded to a suspected drone strike at RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, with no casualties reported. The Defence Ministry confirmed that the strike occurred around midnight and emphasized that force protection measures remain at the highest level. The incident follows Britain’s recent approval for the United States to use British bases for defensive strikes targeting Iranian missile infrastructure.

Tensions in the Strait of Hormuz

Iranian media reported that an oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz, which allegedly ignored warnings from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), was targeted and sustained significant damage, causing it to begin sinking. The report described the incident as direct enforcement of Iran’s maritime security measures in one of the world’s most strategically important shipping lanes.

In response, Hapag-Lloyd Shipping announced the suspension of all vessel traffic through the Strait until further notice, citing safety concerns. Shipping analysts warned that the disruption could have significant implications for global oil supply, as the Strait handles approximately one-fifth of the world’s seaborne oil trade.

According to Reuters, shipping data indicate that at least 150 oil and gas tankers are currently halted in Gulf waters outside the Strait, awaiting clarity on safe passage. Maritime authorities and insurance companies are closely monitoring the situation, highlighting the potential economic and logistical impact if tensions continue to escalate.

The incident adds to rising regional tensions, following a series of Iranian attacks in the Gulf and increased military activity by the United States, the United Kingdom, and allied Gulf states. Analysts warn that continued confrontations in the Strait of Hormuz could pose a serious threat to international trade and global energy security.

1. Survival of the Regime

Airstrikes alone cannot topple entrenched and complex regimes like Iran. Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu might declare victory if Iran’s nuclear program and military infrastructure are destroyed, potentially supervising internal restructuring of the leadership.

There is also the possibility of intensive diplomatic intervention from Moscow and Beijing to impose a settlement that halts the strikes in exchange for broader regional security arrangements. Russian President Vladimir Putin condemned the targeting of Iranian leadership, calling it a “serious violation of regional stability.”

Putin has acted as a mediator with Gulf states—the UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar—emphasizing Moscow’s readiness to leverage its relations with Iran to calm regional tensions and push both sides toward de-escalation. While maintaining close ties with Washington, Russia avoids direct confrontation with either side.

China, from the outset, has called for a cessation of hostilities and political dialogue, holding all parties responsible for preventing a wider conflict. From Iran’s perspective, limited military escalation is possible: attacks on commercial vessels or military installations in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz may continue, with restrained responses from Western countries, such as intercepting drones or launching defensive missiles. This scenario could disrupt maritime traffic and raise global oil prices, but it is unlikely that any single country could fully contain the escalation.

2. Regime Change (External Intervention)

Trump’s desired outcome mirrors the Venezuelan scenario following the US-backed overthrow of President Nicolás Maduro, where the political facade changes but the core power structure remains under external supervision.

This scenario is unlikely in Iran, given its six-thousand-year civilization and deeply entrenched political structures.

A broader regional escalation—a direct military confrontation between Iran, the United States, and Israel, potentially involving Gulf allies—could extend to Iraq, Yemen, and Lebanon. Such a scenario would threaten international shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz, cause severe economic repercussions for global energy markets, and put critical infrastructure at risk.

3. Regime Change (Internal Opposition)

The opposition advocates overthrowing the Islamic Republic and replacing it with a pro-Western democratic system, potentially led by the son of the late Shah as a transitional leader. Alternatively, the United States could attempt to impose regime change with control over oil resources, similar to Iraq.

Challenges include strong internal resistance, ethnic and regional diversity, and the resilience of Iran’s political and social systems.

4. Collapse and Chaos

Although Iran is not divided along sectarian lines, tensions in Arab and Azerbaijani regions could lead to the collapse of security forces, resulting in multi-faceted chaos.

• Iraq: Escalation of armed activity between Iranian-backed Shiite factions and other groups is possible, with fears of a security vacuum in southern cities and along the border.• Syria: Continued conflict could trigger increased Israeli attacks on Iranian and Hezbollah positions, worsening the humanitarian crisis and increasing internal and external displacement.• Lebanon: Hezbollah may face direct pressure from Israel, exacerbating sectarian and political tensions. Military confrontation could partially collapse Lebanese state institutions, already weakened by economic and political crises.• Arabian Gulf: Kuwait, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia could be affected by cross-border missile or drone attacks, prompting heightened security measures or new military alliances with the United States.

Potential Causes of Chaos:

• Internal crises, including rising prices, unemployment, and strain on security forces.• Expansion of ethnic or regional conflicts involving the Baloch, Kurds, and Arabs.• Economic disruption in Arab countries dependent on oil, gas, or trade through the Strait of Hormuz.

5. Widespread Regional War

Conflict could expand to Lebanon, Iraq, and the Gulf, involving Iran’s allies and plunging the region into uncontrollable violence. Ongoing military operations carry the risk of a chain reaction that no one can manage. This trajectory could include wider retaliatory strikes, threats to navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, and sharp increases in energy prices, placing major powers under direct test.

6. Political and Diplomatic Solutions

Through international pressure, Iran and other relevant countries could agree to de-escalate tensions and open temporary channels for negotiation. This might lead to short-term agreements to secure the Strait of Hormuz and resume shipping, supported by continued maritime monitoring.

7. Economic Pressure and Sanctions

Western and Gulf states could intensify economic measures against Iran, targeting its oil, banking, and shipping sectors. These actions would increase economic pressure on Tehran while reinforcing regional cooperation to safeguard energy supplies and maritime trade routes.

For decades, Israel and the United States have pressured Iran over its uranium enrichment program, claiming it could mask nuclear weapons development. Iran has consistently denied pursuing nuclear weapons, asserting its right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes.

U.S. intelligence concluded that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program in 2003, following the Iraq invasion, and reiterated last year that Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon. Nevertheless, Israel has suggested that Iran may be secretly pursuing one.

© Eurasia Review