What began as a conflict aimed at crippling Iran’s nuclear ambitions has now changed into a battle over oil and gas, with the strikes on Kharg Island, disruptions to the Strait of Hormuz, and shocking global energy markets highlighting how the war’s stakes extend far beyond Tehran’s nuclear programme.
The attacks on Iran on February 28, 2026 were the result of years of tension surrounding Iran’s nuclear programme, as well as the ongoing rivalry between the United States, Israel and Iran. These tensions can be traced back to the Iranian Revolution in 1979, when Iran’s monarchy was overthrown and replaced by an Islamic government that strongly opposed Western influence. Since then, relations between Iran and the West have declined almost over, evolving into a deep political and ideological conflict that continues to shape global geopolitics today.
The situation intensified as Israel increasingly viewed Iran’s growing military capabilities and nuclear ambitions as a serious security threat. Israel has long argued that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose an existential danger to its survival. Iran, on the other hand, strongly opposes Israel’s existence and has supported groups that are engaged in conflict with Israel across the region. The United States, a close partner of Israel, also views Iran as a major regional threat and has repeatedly sought to limit Iran’s nuclear and military capabilities.
After a brief conflict in 2025 and years of rising threats and hostility, diplomatic negotiations between the United States and Iran eventually collapsed in February 2026. Just two days later, the United States and Israel launched coordinated airstrikes targeting Iranian military and nuclear facilities. The attacks marked a major escalation and quickly triggered a wider regional conflict.
The unpredicted outcome
The situation reached a dramatic turning point when Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, was reported to have been killed. Many observers initially believed that his death could weaken Iran’s leadership and potentially bring the conflict to a quicker end.
However, the outcome unfolded very differently. Rather than weakening Iran, Khamenei’s death appeared to strengthen the country’s resolve. Iran responded with stronger retaliation and harsher warnings, signalling that it remained determined and capable of sustaining the conflict. Instead of bringing the war closer to an end, the escalation deepened tensions and raised fears that the conflict could expand further across the region.
World at stake
The crisis also intensified concerns over global energy security. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most important oil chokepoints, with roughly 20% of global oil consumption and liquefied natural gas trade passing through the waterway. Even with pipelines and alternative shipping routes, only a limited portion of the oil that normally passes through the strait can be rerouted. Any disruption could therefore trigger global energy shortages and push oil prices sharply higher.
Tensions escalated further when the United States launched strikes on military targets on Kharg Island, Iran’s main oil export hub. The strikes targeted missile depots, radar systems, and other military infrastructure, but reportedly spared the oil terminals. The New York Post cited that “U.S. forces successfully struck more than 90 Iranian military targets on Kharg Island, while preserving the oil infrastructure.” President Trump announced the strike Friday night (13 March 2026), calling it the “most powerful bombing raids in the history of the Middle East.”
While the attack was intended to weaken Iran’s military capabilities, any serious damage to Kharg Island’s oil infrastructure could have sent shockwaves through global energy markets. Sparing the oil facilities also avoided triggering a further global energy crisis, which could have backfired politically and economically for the U.S. Iran, on the other hand, warned that oil and energy facilities connected to the U.S. or its allies could become targets. Iranian military officials said that infrastructure belonging to companies cooperating with the United States could be destroyed if Iran’s own energy facilities were attacked.
News and reports continue to indicate that the war is rapidly escalating. Israel has expanded airstrikes inside Iran, while Iran is retaliating with missiles and drones across the Gulf. Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE have intercepted new Iranian missiles and drones, reflecting the widening scope of the conflict. As the United States continues to target Iranian military facilities, including on Kharg Island, and tensions around the Strait of Hormuz remain high, with Iran threatening to close or restrict passage, these developments raise fears of a wider regional war and severe disruptions to global energy supplies.
Not a traditional war
While the world has long viewed the United States as the ultimate superpower, Iran has now re-evaluated US standards and redefined its military strategy, taking into account the potential impacts on the global economy. Today’s war is no longer just about military bases, energy systems and economic infrastructure are now part of the battlefield.
Analysts and policymakers are drawing several key lessons from the conflict. Modern wars are no longer just military affairs; they now have the ability to disrupt the entire global economy. Technology plays a critical role in modern warfare, and the cost of sustaining such conflicts is a major factor. No defense system is perfect, meaning even the most powerful militaries cannot guarantee total protection. Moreover, regime change through military strikes is extremely difficult; while the attacks severely damaged Iran’s infrastructure, the Iranian regime remained intact and continued resisting.
