KARACHI: The Pakistan Meteorological Department (PMD) on Monday cautioned that the pollution resulting from the recent US-Israeli attacks on Iran’s oil sites could worsen air quality in western parts of the country.
“Due to [the] recent situation in Iran, the winds may carry pollutants and deteriorate air quality in the western parts of the country,” read a press release issued by the PMD.
A partial screengrab of a PMD press release issued on March 9, 2026.
Iran, Pakistan’s western neighbour, has been embroiled in a war with the United States and Israel since the latter’s February 28 strikes that assassinated its supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Major airstrikes on Tehran’s refineries and fuel depots on March 7 plunged the Iranian capital into a toxic gloom as black, oily rain fell on Sunday.
In Tehran, the sun was blotted out by thick black smoke billowing from oil facilities that continued to smoulder.
CNN correspondent Frederik Pleitgen described the scene at Tehran’s Shahran oil depot as “apocalyptic”, adding that “breathing the air feels quite toxic”.
The Iranian Red Crescent Society warned civilians of severe health risks, cautioning that the “significant quantities of toxic hydrocarbons, sulfur and nitrogen oxides” released could cause chemical burns and lung damage.
Further strikes by the US and Israel hit five oil facilities in and near Tehran, according to an official with the National Iranian Oil Products Distribution Company.
Showers expected in upper parts
In its press release, the PMD predicted that rain and thunderstorms were likely in the upper parts of the country under the influence of a westerly wave that was to approach on Monday evening and persist until March 12.
The PMD said “partly cloudy to cloudy weather conditions with chances of moderate rain-wind-thunderstorm (few heavy falls at times)” were expected in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Dir, Kohistan, Chitral, Swat, Shangla, Battagram, Buner, Malakand, Mansehra, Abbottabad and Haripur.
It predicted the same for Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) and Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK) from Monday evening to March 12.
On March 10 and 11, “light rain-wind/thunderstorm” was likely in Khyber, Mohmand, Peshawar, Swabi, Mardan, Charsadda, Nowshera, Bajaur, Bannu, Waziristan, Orakzai, Kurram, Kohat, Hangu and Mianwali.
According to PMD, “rain-wind/thunderstorm” was expected in Islamabad, the Potohar region, Murree, Galliyat and surroundings from Monday night to March 11 with occasional gaps.
“Hailstorm at isolated places is also likely in Islamabad and upper parts of the country during the forecast period,” the statement added.
Listing the possible impacts, the Met Office said daytime temperatures were expected to decrease by three to four degrees Celsius in the country’s upper parts.
It warned that landslides may occur in vulnerable areas of upper KP, GB and AJK during the period. The PMD advised tourists to avoid unnecessary travelling and urged farmers to manage their crops according to the prevailing weather.
WASHINGTON: Tehran has confirmed the selection of Mojtaba Khamenei as Iran’s new Supreme Leader, a decision that has drawn contrasting reactions from Washington and Jerusalem, reflecting differing strategies in responding to Iran’s evolving leadership.
US response: calculated and cautious
So far, President Donald Trump has avoided direct criticism of Mojtaba Khamenei’s succession, instead framing the development in terms of energy markets and US strategic influence.
In a post on Truth Social, an hour after the announcement, he highlighted that temporary oil price increases were a minor cost compared with global stability and security.
But in an interview with ABC News earlier on Sunday, Trump repeated his suggestion that Iran’s next leader would need “approval” from Washington, implying that the US has a role in shaping acceptable leadership outcomes.
While he described Khamenei’s expected appointment as problematic, he refrained from threatening direct military action.
This approach underscores the US balancing act: managing domestic political narratives, calming global energy markets, reassuring allies, and containing regional conflict without provoking an open war.
Israel’s reaction: direct and aggressive
Israel, by contrast, has taken a markedly confrontational stance. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz warned that any new leader linked to Iran’s ruling elite would be “an unequivocal target for elimination”.
The Israeli military stated that it would hold successors personally accountable, a message highlighting Jerusalem’s readiness to continue targeted operations against Iranian leadership figures it perceives as threats.
Even before Mojtaba Khamenei’s formal appointment, Israel had stepped up strikes on Iranian infrastructure and proxy positions in the region, demonstrating its willingness to apply pressure not just on policy but on individuals associated with Tehran’s strategic direction.
Implications
Mojtaba Khamenei, reportedly close to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), is seen by analysts as a continuation of Iran’s hardline policies rather than a turn toward moderation.
His selection maintains the ideological path established by his late father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and signals the persistence of the established power structure.
Experts note that many Iranians had hoped for a shift toward a system led by elected officials rather than a clerical figure. That aspiration, observers say, appears curtailed by the ongoing pressures of regional conflict and foreign intervention.
For Washington, the appointment complicates potential diplomatic engagement. A leader embedded in Iran’s security apparatus and ideological establishment — whose family has already suffered casualties from prior US and Israeli strikes — is unlikely to be a partner in negotiation in the near term.
The US response reflects a deliberate strategy: maintaining leverage while avoiding overt military confrontation, stabilising energy markets, and coordinating with European and Gulf partners to manage a volatile situation.
“Volatility has become so extreme that suppliers are quoting prices valid for only an hour,” says Fahd Chinoy, CEO of Pakistan Cables, in an exclusive interview with Dawn last Friday.
Constituting about 60 to 80 per cent of the cost of wire and cables, copper is an essential imported input. In the last six months, copper prices have surged from around $10,000 per tonne to over $13,000 by the time markets closed on March 6, according to the London Metal Exchange.
While international copper prices may eventually fall due to potential global demand destruction and recessionary pressures, Pakistan Cables’ immediate challenge lies in its supply chains. The conversation carried a sense of déjà vu from the pandemic years, when companies were forced to rethink logistics and sourcing strategies.
Just before the interview, Mr Chinoy’s team discovered that some shipments of raw materials might already be delayed because of the war. In an industry that traditionally runs on tight inventories to control working capital costs, such disruptions create immediate strategic dilemmas.
“Do we start building inventory?” he asks rhetorically. “Is everyone going to rush to stockpile raw materials?”
Even before the latest conflict, the global transition to electrification was increasing copper demand since renewable energy systems, electric vehicles, and data centres all require vast quantities of copper wiring.
Beyond copper, aluminium is a very important metal in the cables industry, and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries are important players. Bahrain’s Aluminium Bahrain (Alba) and the UAE’s Emirates Global Aluminium (EGA) provide nearly 9pc of the world’s primary metal.
However, the US’s attack on Iran has made sourcing aluminium logistically very challenging. With the Strait of Hormuz effectively a “no-go” zone for many shippers, aluminium prices have already decoupled from historical norms, recently climbing past $3,400 per ton, their highest level in nearly four years after Alba halted shipments.
Often sitting between 2pc and 4pc, margins in the cable industry are razor-thin. With her metal prices and supply disruptions, the final cost of a finished cable could rise sharply.
Investments in hard times
In one of the company’s most ambitious undertakings since its founding, Pakistan Cables recently shifted its entire manufacturing operation from its original Karachi site to a bigger new facility in Nooriabad. The move involved relocating dozens of machines while keeping production running and customers supplied, a logistical feat that required careful coordination and significant financial investment.
The new plant, built on a much larger site, integrates multiple stages of cable production into one location, incorporates modern equipment designed to improve efficiency and quality, and is the only one of its kind in Pakistan, says Mr Chinoy.
“It was a huge project,” he recalls. “We had to shift machinery while continuing to meet customer demand. But now that everything is consolidated, our operations are much smoother.”
The expansion came at a difficult time. The company had started investing heavily just as the pandemic disrupted global commerce and Pakistan’s economic crisis pushed interest rates sharply higher. Borrowing costs soared while supply chains became increasingly unpredictable.
Weathering the difficult times, the company was poised for better times ahead. Mr Chinoy expected that, without the war, the country would have been on a path to growth within 18 to 24 months.
“Hypothetically, if Pakistan were to see 5pc GDP growth, that could translate into 10pc growth in construction, which for us could mean 30pc to 40pc growth in volumes,” he says.
Future-proofing the company, Mr Chinoy says Pakistan Cables remains committed to expanding capacity to capture that potential demand.
Demand drivers in crisis
Maintaining a positive outlook, Mr Chinoy says, there are opportunities in crisis.
Given how heavily dependent the business is on imports, opening letters of credit was a challenge during the 2022-2023 period when Pakistan was forced to impose administrative curbs to prevent dollars from leaving the country.
To access dollars for imports, a company needed to bring in dollars through exports. It is during this time that Mr Chinoy used the crisis to drive momentum towards exports. The small base effect, exports have grown roughly three times since then, Mr Chinoy estimates.
Despite the stagnant construction phase in recent years, the cable industry has had three demand drivers. Firstly, investments in electricity grids and solarisation. High electricity tariffs have driven consumers towards solar, which has become a significant tailwind for the cable industry, as about 10pc of the total value of any residential or industrial solar project is now comprised of specialised cabling for solar.
Secondly, the shift towards electric vehicles (EVs) has been a boon for the cable industry globally, as an average EV requires approximately four times as much copper as a conventional internal combustion vehicle due to its extensive wiring.
Thirdly, the massive global investment in data centres is creating a surge in demand for specialised cabling.
Way forward
Commenting on the way forward, Mr Chinoy was pragmatic. While the current geopolitical climate presents a “doomsday scenario” for global trade, the cable industry is no more vulnerable than any other sector reliant on heavy raw material imports, he said.
“We are uniquely positioned to weather this storm because we are fully vertically integrated across copper, aluminium, and PVC. This structure allows us to drive internal efficiencies that others simply cannot match,” he said optimistically.
Published in Dawn, The Business and Finance Weekly, March 9th, 2026
Global oil markets have already begun to register the first tremors of the conflict. Within days of the escalation, Brent crude surged from roughly $70 per barrel in early February to around $90 by early March 2026, a rise of nearly 25 per cent. Such rapid price spikes represent classic geopolitical supply shocks, where the mere risk of disrupted tanker routes or damaged Gulf infrastructure forces markets to reprice energy almost instantly. For energy-importing economies like Pakistan, the consequences begin not on the battlefield but in the balance of payments.
Wars in the Middle East rarely remain confined to their borders; as witnessed during the 1973 Arab oil embargo and the 1990 Gulf War, regional conflicts swiftly reverberate through global energy markets and distant economies. The latest US–Israeli assault on Iran in February 2026, accompanied by retaliatory strikes and blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, has once again jolted oil markets and maritime trade, sending shockwaves across commodity exchanges and freight insurance systems.
Oil markets, notoriously sensitive to geopolitical risk, have reacted swiftly. Roughly a 25 per cent increase within weeks as traders priced in the risk of shipping disruptions, tightening sanctions and possible damage to Gulf infrastructure. Tanker premiums have climbed, war-risk insurance has multiplied, and shipping companies have begun diverting vessels away from contested waters.
The effects extend beyond crude oil alone. Global gas markets, fertiliser supply chains and petrochemical exports are already reflecting heightened volatility as uncertainty spreads across energy trade routes.
The ongoing US-Israel-Iran conflict means higher oil prices, volatile LNG markets, transport inflation and uncertainty in cross-border electricity supplies
For Pakistan, a country deeply dependent on imported fuels, the consequences are immediate and severe. As a net energy importer reliant on Gulf suppliers for more than 80pc of its crude oil and nearly all of its liquefied natural gas, Pakistan’s economic stability becomes vulnerable whenever turmoil grips the region. Higher oil prices threaten to widen the current account deficit, accelerate imported inflation and strain fiscal resources already constrained by the country’s $7 billion programme with the International Monetary Fund. Energy imports consistently represent the largest component of Pakistan’s import bill, meaning that every surge in global prices quickly translates into macroeconomic stress.
Firstly, the transportation sector becomes the most immediate casualty of such shocks. Road transport accounts for the largest share of Pakistan’s petroleum consumption, with diesel powering freight corridors that connect farms, industrial centres and ports. Because nearly all petroleum products are imported, global price fluctuations transmit directly into domestic costs. The estimates show that a $10 increase in oil prices can inflate Pakistan’s annual import bill by approximately $1.5–$2bn. With Brent crude hovering near $87 per barrel, freight costs are rising, cascading into higher food prices, construction expenses and logistics costs. Export sectors such as textiles and agriculture also face shrinking margins as transportation costs climb.
Secondly, Pakistan’s power sector faces a parallel shock through liquefied natural gas (LNG) markets. Over the past decade, LNG imports have become central to the country’s electricity generation strategy. Combined-cycle power plants were built to replace furnace oil generation, but this transition also tethered Pakistan’s electricity system to volatile global gas markets.
As Asian LNG spot prices rise amid regional uncertainty, generation costs for gas-fired plants increase once again. Although long-term supply agreements with Qatar offer partial insulation, these contracts remain indexed to international price benchmarks and shipping costs. Higher fuel costs eventually feed into electricity tariffs, aggravating Pakistan’s persistent circular debt in the power sector and placing additional pressure on households and industries.
Thirdly, geopolitical escalation threatens Pakistan’s limited but strategically significant electricity trade with Iran. Cross-border transmission lines currently supply roughly 100 megawatts of electricity to districts in Balochistan, including the port city of Gwadar. For communities historically underserved by the national grid, this electricity represents a vital lifeline. However, intensified sanctions, infrastructure disruptions or political pressures could easily interrupt these supplies. Such disruptions would deepen energy deprivation in already fragile regions and highlight the vulnerability of cross-border energy arrangements in geopolitically volatile environments.
The debate surrounding the proposed Gwadar coal power plant further illustrates these vulnerabilities. Originally conceived as a 300-megawatt imported coal facility under the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor framework, the project increasingly appears economically outdated. An imported coal plant would lock Gwadar into long-term fuel imports, foreign exchange exposure and maritime supply risks, precisely the vulnerabilities now being exposed by the Gulf conflict.
Given Gwadar’s strong solar irradiance and relatively modest electricity demand, a more rational pathway would be to repurpose the project toward utility-scale solar generation supported by Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS). Such a configuration would deliver reliable electricity without fuel imports, reduce exposure to maritime disruptions and position Gwadar as a model for clean port-city development.
Fourthly, amid these vulnerabilities, Pakistan’s rapidly expanding solar sector offers an unexpected strategic cushion. Over the past several years, households and businesses across the country have quietly installed rooftop photovoltaic systems to hedge against rising electricity tariffs and unreliable grid supply.
By 2026, distributed solar capacity, both off-grid and net-metered, is estimated to have reached nearly 18 gigawatts. This transformation has largely been driven by private investment financed through remittances and household savings rather than state-led programmes. Its strategic significance is profound. Unlike oil shipments navigating contested waterways, solar electricity originates within national borders and remains immune to geopolitical chokepoints.
Fifthly, a solar-dominated energy system, however, requires a different form of resilience. Traditional hydrocarbon systems relied on stockpiles of crude oil and petroleum products stored in tanks and strategic reserves. Renewable electricity systems instead depend on storage infrastructure such as batteries, pumped hydro and flexible grid management. Grid-scale BESS therefore become the renewable equivalent of strategic petroleum reserves. By storing excess solar generation during daylight hours and releasing it during evening demand peaks, storage systems can stabilise electricity supply while reducing reliance on imported fuels.
Finally, demand-side management represents an equally important pillar of energy security. Smart metres, time-of-use tariffs, efficient appliances and industrial load management programmes can significantly reduce peak demand and improve system efficiency. In periods of volatile fuel markets, managing consumption can be as effective as expanding supply.
The ongoing confrontation between the United States, Israel and Iran demonstrates once again how regional conflicts reverberate across distant economies. For Pakistan, the risks are unmistakable: higher oil prices, volatile LNG markets, transport inflation and uncertainty in cross-border electricity supplies.
However, crises also illuminate strategic choices. Expanding solar energy, investing in electricity storage and strengthening demand-side efficiency can gradually reduce Pakistan’s exposure to imported hydrocarbons.
In the evolving energy landscape of the 21st century, sovereignty will increasingly depend not on control of oil routes alone but on the resilience of national electricity systems and the capacity to generate power from resources that no geopolitical conflict can blockade.
The writer has a doctorate in Energy Economics and serves as a research fellow in Sustainable Development Policy Institute.
Pakistan’s geographic proximity and brotherly relationship with Iran and the Gulf Cooperation Council states, combined with its attempt to balance relations with both China and the United States, have pushed it to the centre of the geopolitical turbulence triggered by the war unleashed on Iran by the United States and Israel; one might say the country is, metaphorically, in the eye of a perfect storm.
The crisis erupted at a moment when global policymakers were already warning about rising geopolitical risks. When political and corporate leaders gathered at the World Economic Forum in Davos earlier this year, they identified four forces likely to shape the next decade of global growth: geopolitics, energy transition, artificial intelligence (AI) and climate change.
The US–Israel war with Iran has abruptly transformed that framework from a theoretical forecast into an immediate economic reality. For years, geopolitics was treated as secondary to the efficiencies of globalisation; that era is rapidly ending. This confrontation has reintroduced a tangible risk premium across financial markets, energy supply chains and global capital flows.
Three Gulf countries — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Qatar — have reportedly begun reviewing their national budgets and overseas investment strategies following Washington’s decision to proceed with military action despite repeated regional warnings. According to media speculations, policymakers in the Gulf are examining proposals that could reduce exposure to the US and reassess major investment commitments across several international markets.
As the conflict-ridden global front carries on, Pakistan grapples with its first wave of supply disruptions as domestic oil prices rise by Rs55 per liter
Energy policy is emerging as an even more powerful pressure point. Qatar, one of the world’s largest exporters of liquefied natural gas (LNG), is reported to have halted gas production in certain operations, highlighting the seriousness of the unfolding crisis. Any sustained disruption in Gulf energy supplies would inject significant volatility into global markets and place additional strain on already fragile economic conditions.
Pakistan has already begun feeling the consequences of LNG supply disruptions. LNG cargo arrivals from Qatar fell by around 75 per cent in the immediate aftermath of the conflict, forcing the Sui Southern Gas Company to prolong gas shutdowns during Ramazan for households. Both Sui Southern Gas Company and Sui Northern Gas Pipelines Limited have also reduced gas supply to commercial and industrial consumers.
Speaking at a joint press conference along with finance and petroleum ministers last week, Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar confirmed that Qatar has excused from supplying previously agreed volumes of LNG cargoes to Pakistan. The three ministers had gathered late Friday night to announce an unprecedented Rs55 per liter increase in domestic oil prices amidst skyrocketing international prices amidst the Middle East crisis.
During the same press conference, it was announced that Pakistan would now start fixing domestic oil prices every week to align them with the international prices in a timely manner.
Meanwhile, the government has decided to introduce protocols like those practiced during the Covid-19 pandemic (such as car-pooling, work-from-home and online classes for students) to minimise the use of imported fuel. Following Qatar’s energy minister’s remarks on last Friday that oil and gas exporters in the Gulf might stop production “within days”, brent crude oil rose around $90 per barrel. Analysts warn that if the disruption persists, oil prices could climb well beyond $100 per barrel, potentially triggering a new global energy crisis.
International Monetary Fund Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva has warned that the conflict carries “obvious potential to affect global energy prices, market sentiment, growth and inflation.”
This renewed instability is forcing policymakers to rethink long-term energy strategy. United Nations climate chief Simon Stiell has argued that renewable energy now represents “the obvious pathway to energy security and sovereignty.”
AI is also emerging as a central strategic factor. AI is no longer merely a productivity tool but a core component of modern defence, surveillance and cyber operations. The present crisis demonstrates how AI-enabled systems underpin battlefield coordination and intelligence gathering, targeting high value-adversaries and information warfare.
Research by cybersecurity firm Recorded Future notes that cyber operations and AI deception are becoming inseparable from physical conflict.
The country faces mounting pressure on two fronts, as the Middle East moves closer to wider conflict and Islamabad intensifies security operations along its western frontier. The external shock arrives at a time when Pakistan is already managing a fragile balance-of-payments position.
Trade figures for the first eight months of FY26 highlight the strain. Merchandise exports fell 8.7pc year-on-year in February to $2.57 billion. Between July 2025 and February 2026, exports totalled $20.46bn compared with $22.07bn in the year-ago period, according to the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics. Imports during the same period rose 8.1pc to $45.5bn, widening the trade deficit to $25.04bn from $20.04bn a year earlier. Rising global energy prices threaten to expand that gap further, increasing pressure on foreign exchange reserves and the rupee.
Remittances — a stabilising pillar of Pakistan’s economy — may also face pressure if the Middle East conflict disrupts economic activity across the Gulf. More than 60pc of Pakistan’s remittance inflows originate from Gulf Cooperation Council countries, particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Heightened security concerns and delayed investment projects could slow employment growth across construction, services, and energy sectors where Pakistani workers are heavily concentrated.
Published in Dawn, The Business and Finance Weekly, March 9th, 2026
THE US-Israeli assault on Iran has sparked a regional conflict which has plunged the Middle East into chaos. The widening war has engulfed the entire region and has global consequences. Israel has also launched attacks in Lebanon. Washington’s war of choice has exposed Gulf states to retaliatory attacks by Iran, which have inflicted widespread damage. If President Donald Trump thought military action against Iran would be a quick win leading to regime collapse that hasn’t happened — as if governments can be toppled from the air. His administration certainly did not expect Iran’s fierce response and its painful blows to GCC countries.
Trump’s Middle East gamble is a throwback to America’s past imperial forays — in Iraq, Libya and elsewhere — that sought to ‘remake’ the region to serve American interests, but which ended in disaster. The lessons of regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan have not been learnt. This regime-change war is likely to meet the same fate but at higher cost to the region and world.
The US-Israeli action laid bare that Washington negotiated in bad faith with Tehran before it attacked Iran. This was a replay of last year when the US joined Israel in bombing Iranian nuclear installations in the midst of negotiations with Tehran. The foreign minister of Oman, mediating indirect talks this time, said a deal was “within reach”. Instead, Trump opted for war. The Iranian side made significant, unprecedented nuclear concessions including the commitment not to possess material to make a nuclear weapon. But Trump had other objectives. The talks were used as a smokescreen to complete military preparations for an assault that the massive buildup near Iran indicated in previous weeks. There is little doubt that one of the lessons the world will draw from this is whether the US under Trump can be trusted in negotiations.
Trump and his team offered shifting, sometimes conflicting justifications for the strike against Iran, an act of brazen aggression in defiance of international law. At times they said it was a response to an imminent threat from Iran when there was no such threat. In briefings to Congress, Pentagon officials acknowledged the lack of intelligence to show Iran was about to attack US forces. Similarly, the Israeli claim that its attack was to pre-empt an Iranian strike was a canard.
Lessons have not been learnt from past US interventions that ended in disaster.
At various times, Trump said the war objective was to destroy Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities, aid Iranian demonstrators and eliminate a state that backed terrorism. When Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested Israel’s decision to attack forced the US hand, Trump publicly contradicted this. In fact, Trump’s statements indicated his end goal is regime change. Deeming Iran to be at its weakest with its regional allies degraded and also emboldened by his action in Venezuela, Trump figured this was an opportune moment to strike, egged on by Israel. The strategy of decapitating Iranian leaders obviously aimed at regime change.
Trump’s shifting rationale for the war was questioned by his Congressional opponents, who also criticised him for sidelining Congress. Senator Bernie Saunders assailed the war as “illegal, premeditated and unconstitutional”. Senator Chris Van Hollen described it as “a regime-change war” that would leave America less secure. Other critics said Trump neither had a strategy nor an endgame. Conservative and MAGA voices warned of political repercussions in mid-term Congressional elections later this year. Trump narrowly won votes in the Senate and House in moves to halt the war. Public opinion is far from supportive of Trump’s reckless action. The majority of Americans oppose the war according to several polls including the latest Ipsos/Reuters poll.
Iran’s retaliatory strategy has been to expand the conflict by striking Israel as well as US bases and installations in GCC countries with waves of drone and missile attacks. The US and Israel miscalculated the scope and intensity of Iran’s counteroffensive, especially its targeting of the energy and civilian infrastructure of Gulf states. This included attacks on Saudi Arabia’s biggest refinery and Qatar’s liquefied natural gas plant — the world’s largest export facility — forcing it to cease production. In fact, Iran hit and damaged the core business model of GCC states, built on security, tax-free ease of doing business and of being tourism, financial and transportation hubs. It has used low-cost, hard-to-intercept drones to deplete the more expensive missile stockpiles of Gulf states. US defence officials acknowledge this is a “major challenge”.
The aim of Iran’s strategy is to raise the costs of war and reshape US calculations by inflicting damage that becomes hard for Gulf states to bear, forcing them to urge Washington to de-escalate and agree to a ceasefire. The strategy resulted in Qatar and UAE lobbying Arab allies to persuade Trump to find an off-ramp from military operations and resume diplomacy.
Although Iran has now called a halt to strikes against Gulf states unless attacks originate from them, how far its strategy has already worked is an open question. For now, Iranian actions have meant oil has stopped flowing through the Strait of Hormuz. The oil price has surged, which if sustained, can also hit the American economy and drive inflation despite the US being largely self-sufficient. Gas prices have spiked, rising in Europe by over 50 per cent. Global markets have been shaken by fears of an energy price shock while uncertainty about how long the war will last is driving market volatility. Qatar’s energy minister has warned the war could “bring down the economies of the world” and stop all Gulf energy exports within days if the war doesn’t end soon. This shows how Washington is losing control of events.
Meanwhile, the US and Israel have intensified the bombing campaign targeting residential buildings, hospitals and schools in Tehran. Their move to arm Iranian Kurdish militants based in Iraq to launch a ground incursion into Iran to spark an internal uprising not only shows the limits of an air war but is also a reckless policy to open a new front aimed at regime change. Demanding Iran’s “unconditional surrender”, Trump made the outrageous statement that he must have a say in who runs Iran. All this makes the endpoint of the escalating crisis hard to predict. What is certain is the region’s spreading war and destabilisation will have far-reaching ramifications, which will shape the Middle East’s future.
The writer is a former ambassador to the US, UK and UN.
WAR. What is it good for? Thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people are killed, entire nations and regions are devastated with the after-effects rippling for decades, if not centuries, seeding hate and rage that in turn sparks more wars down the line. But that doesn’t mean that war is all bad: depending on how you’re placed and how you play your cards, war can result not in generational trauma, but generational wealth because war can be great for business; all you really have to do is sacrifice whatever remains of your tattered conscience at the altar of accumulation.
So, let’s take a look at who stands to gain in the current US-Israeli war of aggression on Iran. Obviously, we have to start with the arms manufacturers who are seeing some handsome gains and are creating what they like to call ‘value’ for their shareholders. Northrop Grumman, which manufactures stealth bombers and, critically, the missile defence interceptors that are in such demand these days, saw its shares jump six per cent. RTX saw a 5pc gain on the back of their missile and artillery shells business and General Dynamics, known for manufacturing the M1 Abrams tank, Hydra-70 air-to-surface rockets and Gatling gun systems for F-16s, is also raking in the cash.
Tech companies like the incredibly shady Palantir have also been boosted and this is no surprise given how this company was founded with CIA backing and is deeply embedded with defence and intelligence agencies in the US, Europe and Nato. They’re the architects of the dystopian surveillance states that will define the years to come and so it’s no wonder that they’re drowning in gravy at this time.
A rising tide lifts all boats, and so European defence companies, too, are gorging on the scraps, with Germany’s Renk and Italy’s Leonardo also seeing a boost to their stock values. The gains aren’t just based on the current situation, but also on future projections. After all, we see Gulf states already begging for more interceptors and in whatever post-war scenario that emerges one thing is certain: each and every regional player will be lining up to buy weapons.
Who stands to gain in the war against Iran?
Israel is already salivating at the prospect: in a recent interview an Israeli defence analyst waxed lyrical about how “the Israeli security systems in the coming years will be very, very busy selling weapons systems”. When asked how Israel plans to produce all these weapons, the analyst pointed to “1.4 billion Indians” who will become Israel’s production line. So, yeah, that’s coming soon.
Those thinking that the economic disruption will hurt America more than others should think again: if Qatar’s LNG production and export is suspended, the US is poised to gain. They’ve already surpassed Qatar in LNG exports and while, yes, their production is currently nearly at capacity, the US plans to double its capacity by 2031. Here, Qatar’s loss is America’s gain.
But enough of the big boys and their toys. In today’s commodified world, even the littler guys can stand to gain thanks to the proliferation of sites like Kalshi and Polymarket in which you can actually bet on geopolitical outcomes — like what will happen in Iran — in much the same way as some would bet on run rates in a cricket match.
Currently, Polymarket has bets running on when the Iranian government will fall and on what date US ground troops will enter Iran and what the chances of Raza Pahlavi are. And given the nature of these bets, there are mounting accusations and even some evidence of insider trading by those privy to the decision-making processes of the US and Israeli military planners.
One Polymarket user named ‘Maga–myman’ is currently under investigation by Israeli police for being a bit too accurate with his pre-dictions. He made $500,000, accurately predicting the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei, and prior to that, he not only accurately predicted the exact day on which the US and Israel launched the war on Iran, but placed the bet just 71 minutes before the first strikes when the possibility was only 17pc. There’s more: in 2024 the same user had predicted that Israel would attack Iran on Oct 26 and — surprise, surprise — he was right! Now he’s either an absolute savant or an insider privy to classified information who decided to make a few million dollars on the side.
He’s not the only one either; in February this year, Israel indicted a military reservist and a civilian who were using classified IDF intel to place bets on future military operations. Prior to these similar suspicions were raised when users accurately predicted the abduction of Venezuelan president Nicolás Maduro or the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to would-be quisling Corina Machado. So yes, if you’re low on morals and high on contacts, it’s a boon for you when things go boom.
AS Sun Tzu, the master Chinese strategist of antiquity put it, “all warfare is based on deception”. Propaganda has been an essential part of war for centuries, with the victors overplaying their successes and the victims downplaying their losses. But in the current era of information warfare, deception has reached new heights, not only in the actual battlefield, but also in the battle of narratives.
The current Israeli-American aggression against Iran is no exception. In this conflict, as the truth has become blurred in the fog of war, questions have been raised about some of the attacks, particularly counter-attacks believed to have been carried out by Iran.
For example, both Iranians and Arab observers have pointed out that many of the strikes blamed on Tehran targeting Arab civilian and energy infrastructure may have been carried out by someone else. The Saudi editor of Independent Arabia has said he believes not all the attacks were coming from Iran, and that according to some, the war is a US-Israeli “trap” to draw Iran and the Gulf states into direct conflict. Qatar’s former prime minister Hamad bin Jassim has similarly said there are “forces” that want the GCC states to directly fight Iran.
Meanwhile, the UK has said that a drone shot down at a British base in Cyprus was not launched from Iran. Pro-Iran fighters in Lebanon or Iraq could be involved, but this has not yet been proven. While there is little doubt that Iran is involved in many of the retaliatory attacks, the facts raise suspicions that another player may be at work, taking advantage of the situation, through deception, to bring Iran and the Arabs into direct conflict. And it is not difficult to guess the identity of this player.
Israel has a long, dark history of deception and hasbara. It is entirely possible that Tel Aviv is involved in targeting civilian and non-military facilities, while falsely implicating Iran. If hostilities increase between Tehran and the Arabs, Israel would have won through minimal effort. Hence, the Iranians and Arabs need to be wary of Israel’s sinister efforts.
Iran’s president did the right thing by pledging to cease attacks on his Gulf neighbours. The Arabs, on their part, should not allow themselves to be trapped into opening a front against Tehran. Arguably, the US and Israel care little for either the Arabs or the Iranians. The former is interested in multibillion-dollar arms deals with wealthy Arab sheikhdoms to prop up its military-industrial complex, while the latter wants the region to shatter so that its dream — a nightmare for most — of ‘Greater Israel’ can be achieved. The region must be wary of these attempts to send it up in flames.
QAMISHLI: Kurdish residents of northeast Syria warned Iran’s Kurds against aligning with the US to fight the Iranian government, citing their own experience in Syria in recent months as evidence their Iranian counterparts would be “abandoned.” Iranian Kurdish militias based in northern Iraq have consulted with the United States in recent days about whether and how to attack security forces in western Iran, as the United States and Israel pound Iran with air strikes.
But Syria’s Kurds warned their Iranian counterparts against partnering with Washington. “I hope that the Kurds of Iran will not ally themselves with America, because they will abandon them,” said Saad Ali, a 45-year-old resident of the northeastern Syrian Kurdish town of Qamishli.
“Tomorrow, if an agreement is made between them (the US) and the Iranians, they will eliminate you. Do not make our mistakes,” he said. Syrian Kurdish fighters aligned with the US more than a decade ago to fight the militant Islamic State group, setting up their own semi-autonomous zone in the territory they had seized from the ultraconservative Islamist fighters. But in January, Syria’s new army under President Ahmed al-Sharaa captured most of the Kurdish-held areas in a sweeping offensive. Syria’s Kurds called on the US to intervene on their behalf, and felt betrayed when Washington instead urged them to merge with Sharaa’s forces.
Kurds’ bitter experience
It remains a bitter experience for Syria’s Kurds and a lesson they say should be heeded by Iranian Kurds. “In my opinion, the Kurds in Iran should maintain a firm stance: they will not engage in any wars within Iranian territory without firm, signed guarantees from the United States regarding the future of these Kurdish regions in Iran,” said Amjad Kardo, a 26-year-old Syrian Kurd in Qamishli.
“We Kurds here in Syria, in particular, have had a negative experience with the Americans in Syria, and their abandonment of Kurdish resistance movements.” An Iranian Kurdish source said Kurdish leaders did have concerns about being “betrayed” like the Kurdish groups in northern Syria.
The source said Iranian Kurdish leaders had requested guarantees from the US, without saying what they were. US President Donald Trump said on Thursday it would be “wonderful” if Kurdish forces crossed the border from northern Iraq into Iran, but declined to answer a question on whether the US would offer them air support if they did so. On Saturday, he appeared to switch positions, telling reporters he doesn’t want Kurdish fighters going into Iran.
Exercise caution
Ahmed Barakat, head of the Kurdish Progressive Democratic Party in Syria, said that Iranian Kurdish forces should exercise “extreme caution”. Barakat said the decision was ultimately up to them, but he believed that “accepting the invitation of the United States and being considered the spearhead in confronting or weakening the Iranian regime is not, at present, in the best interest of the Kurds of Iran.”
Israel has been holding its own talks with Iranian Kurdish insurgent groups based in the semi-autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan for around a year, this news agency reported last week. The Kurds are an ethnic group which was left stateless a century ago when the borders of the modern Middle East emerged from the collapsing Ottoman Empire.
Mostly Sunni Muslims, they are concentrated in a mountainous region straddling the borders of Armenia, Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkiye. In Iraq, they inhabit three northern provinces led by their own regional government. But in other countries — Iran, Turkiye and now Syria — their dreams of an autonomous region or state have remained out of reach.
• Najafabad ‘double-tap’ airstrike kills 19 civilians seeking municipal services, emergency workers • Bombing of Qeshm Island desalination plant cuts off fresh water to 30 villages
THE United States and Israel stand accused of committing “war crimes” in Iran, after a series of recent airstrikes that have killed hundreds of civilians and devastated non-military infrastructure, targeting a water desalination plant, and a park housing emergency responders, hospitals, and schools.
The accusations followed a deadly strike on Sunday morning in Najafabad, where local officials reported 19 civilians were killed.
Akbar Salehi, the security and law enforcement deputy of the Isfahan Governorate, said fighter jets he linked to the US and Israel struck a local office for traffic and driving services. He added that a second missile targeted the same location minutes later as residents and emergency personnel were attempting to rescue the wounded.
The Iranian Red Crescent Society said it has formally requested the International Criminal Court to initiate a war crimes investigation, submitting data alleging that more than 6,600 civilian structures have been damaged or destroyed since the conflict began.
In another severe attack on vital public utilities, a US strike hit a freshwater desalination facility on Qeshm Island in southern Iran, cutting off water supplies to 30 villages.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragchi condemned the attack as a “blatant and desperate crime” targeting civilian lifelines.
“The US committed a blatant and desperate crime by attacking a freshwater desalination plant on Qeshm Island,” Araqchi said in a post on X.
“Attacking Iran’s infrastructure is a dangerous move with grave consequences”.
‘Double-tap’ at Zibashahr park
Meanwhile, an in-depth investigation by New Lines Magazine into a separate March 5 air strike on Zibashahr Park in Shiraz has raised questions about targeting practices.
The report, which analysed satellite imagery and verified videos, confirmed that the strike destroyed a base for emergency medical responders inside the park, killing a reported 20 people and injuring 30. Three medical workers were among the dead.
Satellite imagery showed that a known military installation, including the faculty of an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps unit, located just 200 meters away, was left untouched.
“It’s a bit inexplicable. The only identifiable military target wasn’t struck,” Adil Haque, a professor of the law of armed conflict at Rutgers University, told the magazine.
Wes Bryant, a former Pentagon targeting chief, reviewed the evidence and said the precision of modern munitions makes such an incident highly unlikely to be an accident.
“With those precision munitions, it’s very rare to have a miss,” Bryant said. “I’ve literally never seen one that has missed to the point of going 200 meters across the road.”
Civilian targets
Reports from media outlets and humanitarian organisations document a widespread pattern of damage to civilian sites.
A CNN forensic investigation, using satellite imagery and verified videos, concluded that US and Israeli strikes on military and police facilities in Tehran also damaged at least three nearby hospitals.
Dr Pir Hossein Kolivand, president of the Iranian Red Crescent Society, provided extensive data in his letter to the ICC. Kolivand’s field assessment reported that 7,943 residential units, 1,617 commercial units, 32 pharmaceutical and medical centres, and 65 educational schools have been damaged.
A missile also struck a sports hall in Lamerd, Fars Province, killing 18 people, primarily teenage girls gathered for training, according to local Iranian media.
Separately, Switzerland’s Federal Department of Foreign Affairs issued a statement expressing deep concern over the military strikes on Iran. The Swiss government called for “full compliance with international law and urges de-escalation”, while urgently updating its travel advice for nationals in the region.
TEHRAN: A massive fireball erupts after an oil depot was targeted by US-Israeli bombing. The destruction of refineries and storage facilities in Iran’s capital precipitated a toxic ‘oil rain’ over the city, with skies darkened by thick black smoke.—AFP
• Capital plunges into darkness; residents warned of chemical burns, acrid fumes • Lebanon terrorised as Israeli strike targets Beirut hotel • Israel, Trump vow to pursue, kill any successor to Khamenei • Iran unleashes missiles on Gulf neighbours; Pezeshkian says they were ‘forced to respond’ • Arab League condemns ‘reckless’ Iranian attacks as diplomacy falters • Bahrain blames Tehran for attack on water plant
TEHRAN: Residents of Iran’s capital awoke on Sunday to a darkened, apocalyptic sky as a black, oily rain fell, a day after Israeli airstrikes targeted refineries and fuel depots, plunging the sprawling metropolis into a toxic gloom.
The nine-day-old war launched by a US-Israeli coalition against Iran has now engulfed much of the Middle East, with strikes and counter-strikes rocking Lebanon, Iraq and several Gulf Arab nations.
In Tehran, the sun was blotted out by thick black smoke billowing from oil facilities that continued to smoulder more than 12 hours after being hit. “I thought my alarm clock was broken,” one driver told AFP. By mid-morning, drivers still needed headlights to navigate main thoroughfares.
CNN correspondent Frederik Pleitgen described it as “raining oil”, saying the rainwater was “black, also saturated, it appears with oil”. He added, “breathing the air feels quite toxic”.
The Iranian Red Crescent Society warned civilians of severe health risks, cautioning that the “significant quantities of toxic hydrocarbons, sulfur and nitrogen oxides” released could cause chemical burns and lung damage.
Tehran’s provincial governor advised citizens to wear face masks, as authorities worked to resolve what they called a “temporarily interrupted” fuel supply that led to long lines at gas stations. The chaos in the capital was a direct consequence of a broad offensive targeting Iran’s military and industrial infrastructure.
The Israeli military confirmed it had launched a “wave of strikes across Iran”, hitting military sites.
A military statement said it had targeted and dismantled the “space force headquarters” of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) in Tehran, a facility it claimed was used to operate the “Khayyam” surveillance satellite.
Further strikes by the US and Israel hit five oil facilities in and near Tehran, according to an official with the National Iranian Oil Products Distribution Company.
At least four tanker drivers were killed in the attacks, the Fars news agency reported. In Iran’s central Isfahan province, at least 11 people were killed in what Iranian media described as US-Israeli attacks on manufacturing workshops and a horse-riding club.
Lebanon terrorised
The conflict also raged on a second front in Lebanon, where clashes between Israel and the resistance group Hezbollah intensified dramatically. Israeli strikes in Lebanon have killed 394 people over the past week, including 83 children, Lebanon’s health ministry reported Sunday.
An Israeli strike hit a hotel in central Beirut for the first time in the new conflict, killing at least four people. The Israeli military said it had “conducted a precise strike targeting key commanders” of the IRGC’s Quds Force inside the hotel.
The attack on the Raouche tourist district, an area untouched even in previous wars, shattered any remaining sense of safety in the capital. “There is no safe place,” said Abu Hussein, a taxi driver whose car was damaged in the blast.
Israel issued evacuation orders for residents of Nabatieh governorate in southern Lebanon, warning that any home used by Hezbollah for military purposes could be targeted.
The heightened hostilities claimed the first Israeli military fatalities in the country, with the army reporting two of its soldiers were killed in combat in southern Lebanon.
Gulf states
OIL mixed with rain drips down the side of a car in Tehran.—X / RKhanizadeh
Meanwhile, Iran’s neighbours in the Persian Gulf found themselves increasingly caught in the crossfire. Ballistic missiles and drones allegedly launched from Iran targeted Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, nations that host US military bases.
The UAE’s defence ministry reported its air defences intercepted 16 of 17 ballistic missiles and 113 of 117 drones detected Sunday alone.
It said the death toll from Iranian attacks had reached four, with 112 people injured.
Kuwait’s defence ministry said fuel tanks at its international airport were targeted in a drone attack and reported two border officers were killed “while performing their duties”. In Saudi Arabia, civil defence officials said a “military projectile” killed two foreign nationals and injured 12 others in Al Kharj governorate.
Meanwhile, Bahrain’s interior ministry said on Sunday that an Iranian drone attack damaged a water desalination plant, accusing Tehran of “randomly” targeting civilian infrastructure.
The IRGC said on Saturday that it had struck the United States’ Juffair base in Bahrain, adding it had been used to attack an Iranian desalination plant earlier in the day.
Bahrain’s national communication office later said the Iranian attack on the desalination facility had no impact on water supplies or network capacity.
The widespread attacks prompted a flurry of warnings, threats and diplomatic condemnations from all sides of the conflict.
‘Forced to respond’
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian warned that his country “will be forced to respond” if any neighbouring country is used as a launchpad for attacks, a day after apologising to Gulf nations for missile strikes on their territories that he said were aimed at American bases.
However, the IRGC struck a more defiant tone, claiming they could fight an “intense war” for six months and announcing a new wave of missile strikes on Tel Aviv and an airbase in Jordan.
In Israel, the military vowed it would pursue every successor to the slain Supreme Leader Khamenei. “At some point, I don’t think there will be anybody left maybe to say ‘We surrender’,” US President Donald Trump told reporters, raising the notion of eliminating Iran’s leadership and military.
A report by Axios, citing multiple sources, said US and Israeli officials have discussed sending special forces into Iran to secure its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.
Another option under consideration, according to the report, is seizing Kharg Island, a terminal responsible for most of Iran’s crude oil exports.
While Israel openly attacked oil infrastructure, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the US “is targeting zero energy infrastructure”, adding that there were “no plans to target Iran’s oil industry”.
Diplomacy
Arab leaders vehemently condemned the attacks on their soil. Arab League Secretary-General Ahmed Aboul Gheit called Iran’s strikes on member states “reckless” and a “massive strategic mistake”.
The UAE’s foreign ministry stressed that while it does not seek escalation, it reserves its full right to safeguard its sovereignty. Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty expressed “full solidarity” with the Gulf states and called for the formation of a joint Arab force to counter regional threats.
Amid the spiralling violence, world leaders called for restraint. The WHO chief, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, decried the “death, destruction, displacement” of war, asking, “When will we learn?”
As France deployed warships to the Mediterranean in a show of solidarity, a Lebanese official confirmed that more than 100 Iranians, including diplomats, were evacuated from Beirut on a Russian plane.
KUWAIT CITY: Smoke rises from a high-rise building following a drone attack.—AFP
DUBAI: Iran’s Assembly of Experts has named Mojtaba Khamenei to replace his father, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, as the country’s new supreme leader, state media reported on Sunday.
Mojtaba, a mid-ranking cleric with close ties to the powerful Revolutionary Guards, had long been viewed by elements of Iran’s ruling establishment as a potential successor to his father, who was assassinated after the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran.
Although Iran’s ruling ideology frowns on the principle of hereditary succession, he has a powerful following within the Guards and his dead father’s still-influential office.
A member of the council, Ayatollah Mohsen Heidari Alekasir, said in a video on Sunday that a candidate had been selected based on Khamenei’s guidance that Iran’s top leader should be “hated by the enemy”.
“Even the Great Satan (US) has mentioned his name,” Heidari Alekasir said of the chosen successor, days after US President Donald Trump said Mojtaba was an “unacceptable” choice for him.
Mojtaba amassed power under his father as a senior figure close to the security forces and the vast business empire they control. He has opposed reformers seeking to engage with the West as it tries to curb Iran’s nuclear programme.
His close ties with the elite Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) give him added leverage across Iran’s political and security apparatus and he has built up influence behind the scenes as his father’s “gatekeeper”, sources familiar with the matter said.
Mojtaba was born in 1969 in Mashhad and grew up as his father was helping lead the opposition to the Shah. As a young man, he served in the Iran-Iraq war.
Mojtaba studied in the seminaries of Qom, Iran’s centre of theological learning, and has the clerical rank of Hojjatoleslam.
He has never held a formal position in the Islamic Republic’s government. He has appeared at loyalist rallies, but has rarely spoken in public.
GWADAR: A fisherman from Gwadar was killed after the debris of an Israeli projectile intercepted by Iranian air defence systems hit his boat in Iranian waters, officials said on Sunday.
Gwadar Deputy Commissioner (DC) Naqibullah Kakar confirmed the incident to Dawn that took place on Saturday, saying that the deceased was identified as Muhammad Tayyab, a resident of Gannz, a small coastal town in Balochistan’s Gwadar district.
District Police Officer Attaur Rehman also confirmed the incident and told Dawn that Tayyab “went into Iranian waters for Iranian oil”.
DC Kakar believes an attempt was made to attack fishing boats in a coastal area of Iran’s Sistan-Baluchistan province, but the projectile was intercepted and destroyed by the Iranian air defence system.
“A portion of the debris from that drone or missile hit Tayyab’s fishing boat, resulting in his death,” he added.
The officials said Tayyab’s body was taken to his native town, Gannz, via the sea, and he was later buried.
Iran, a neighbour of Pakistan, has been engaged in a war with Israel and the US after the latter launched attacks on the Islamic republic on February 28 and assassinated Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
While Israel and the US continue to conduct attacks in Iran, Tehran has conducted drone and missile strikes in Gulf countries, targeting US assets and bases in retaliatory strikes.
A Pakistani driver was killed when “debris from an aerial interception” fell onto a vehicle in Dubai’s Al Barsha area late on Saturday night, according to Dubai Media Office.
This is the second instance of a Pakistani national losing his life in an attack in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) during the ongoing war between Iran and the US and Israel.
The war has expanded in the region, with Iran targeting US assets and bases in Gulf countries and Israel carrying out attacks in Lebanon.
The statement by the Dubai Media Office does not specify which projectile was intercepted during Saturday’s incident, or from where it was fired.
The Pakistani embassy in the UAE said its consulate in Dubai was in direct contact with local authorities to assist the Pakistani national’s family.
“We are profoundly saddened to confirm that a Pakistani national lost his life yesterday in Dubai’s Al Barsha area due to falling debris following the interception of an incoming missile,” the embassy said on X.
“Our Consulate General in Dubai is in direct contact with local authorities to assist the family and facilitate the repatriation process as quickly as possible.
“In this hour of grief, we share in the family’s pain and offer our most sincere prayers,” it added.
The war began on February 28, with the US and Israel launching attacks on Iran. The same day, the UAE defence ministry had reported the death of a person due to falling debris after air defences intercepted missiles targeting sites in Abu Dhabi.
Initially, the defence ministry said an Asian national was killed after the debris fell on a residential area of Abu Dhabi.
Later, UAE authorities confirmed that the victim was a Pakistani national, who was identified as Mureed Zaman, a resident of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Bannu district.
Zaman had been working in Abu Dhabi for nearly eight years, earning a livelihood through labour work and driving. He had been supporting his family back home.
For its part, the UAE conveyed its “sincere condolences and deepest sympathies to the family of the Pakistani national who lost his life as a result of these attacks, expressing its full solidarity with them”.
“The UAE stressed that the targeting of civilians and civilian objects is unequivocally condemned and strictly prohibited under international law and humanitarian principles,” a statement issued by the foreign ministry said.
President Asif Ali Zardari today expressed sorrow over the deaths of two Pakistani nationals in the UAE due to missile debris.
“He conveyed condolences to the bereaved families & urged restraint, warning that rising tensions risk engulfing other countries & threaten regional & global peace & security,” said a statement issued by President House.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif also expressed grief over the two incidents, saying he was “deeply saddened by the tragic” deaths.
“Our diplomatic missions in the UAE are in close contact with the Dubai authorities to provide all necessary assistance and to facilitate the repatriation process. Our hearts go out to the bereaved family in this hour of grief,” he said in a post on X.
AS the Israel-US war on Iran was entering its second week, President Donald Trump demanded an “unconditional surrender” by the Persian Gulf Islamic Republic. But within hours, President Masoud Pezeshkian of the beleaguered nation retorted: they will take their dreams of Iranian people surrendering unconditionally to their grave.
So what can influence the course of this war, including its end?
Apart from claims by the Israel-US coalition of decimating Iran’s nuclear facilities and missile production and launch capabilities, besides decapitating its leadership and destroying its command and control systems, and equally defiant statements by Iran about its own military might, evidence is in short supply about how the war is going.
Given how Iran is being carpet-bombed and how missiles are slamming into various parts of the country, it is not difficult to say that the Israel-US coalition controls the skies over most of the country, with the latter’s air/missile defences knocked out. But, at the same time, Iran continues to launch both drones and missiles at targets in the apartheid state itself and at US military facilities across the Gulf. The decapitation seems to have left intact and functioning Iran’s 12 autonomous military-aerospace commands.
In terms of assessment, American analysts are split into two camps. The first group says that the war is not going America’s way and that one major indication of this is the number of direct hits that US assets, most notably THAAD and Patriot radars and batteries, have taken, exposing or making vulnerable, for example, Gulf allies and the Zionist apartheid state itself.
This war was always about bowing to Netanyahu’s pressure to facilitate the Greater Israel project.
These analysts, among them former US military and intelligence officers and also former CIA experts, maintain that their military will now need to move its missile defence assets positioned in South Korea, and even Taiwan, to the Middle East, for the time being at least.
Their stance carries weight in the light of continuing Iranian drone and missile attacks on targets across the region. The Zionist state and many of the Gulf states, which are at the receiving end of these weapons, have imposed tight censorship but even then, information trickles out and it does not paint a positive picture from their perspective.
Then there are analysts usually seen as close to the defence and intelligence establishment in the US who insist that the war is going well and has so far led to widespread destruction of Iranian nuclear and missile (production and launch) capability and that America’s ascendancy in the air means that their drones can hover over underground facilities and direct heavy bombers to targets accurately.
I’ll leave it to you to assess which of the two points of view are closer to reality but, if it helps, a New York Times investigation has established that the missile attack on a school which killed 165 schoolgirls in Iran was carried out by one of the warships in the USS Abraham Lincoln battle group. And the target was chosen from a map dating back to 2015.
This war was always about bowing to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s pressure to facilitate the Greater Israel project. Top US leaders have all attributed the American campaign to different reasons. Therefore, in military (and even political) terms, the objectives of the war have never been clearly defined or stated.
Perhaps from the Israel-US perspective, the war could continue till Iran is stripped of every single weapon and means with which to challenge the primacy of the apartheid state, and that is why almost every day, objectives shift from the elimination of the nuclear programme to the destruction of Iran’s long-range missile capability to regime change. Trump talks one day about putting “boots on the ground” and two days later says that would be a “waste of time”. Today regime change. Tomorrow something else.
With Congress firmly in his pocket because of the AIPAC-funded/ compromised members’ majority, he can pretty much make up objectives as he goes along. Some critics have suggested that Netanyahu possesses some damning evidence against Trump from the Epstein ‘video archives’. I find hundreds of millions of dollars as campaign donations from Zionists to be an equally compelling reason.
A few things may have a bearing on the course of the war. First and foremost is the impact of the Strait of Hormuz’s closure on oil prices, which have risen nearly 25 per cent in a month and may breach $100 a barrel. Rising prices at the petrol pumps and their impact on the US stock markets will create their own pressure for hostilities to end.
The strait’s closure will also result in a major hit to the oil and gas, and trading and tourism, revenues of the Gulf states. Qatar has gone on record to say that if its gas revenues continue to face disruptions, it might be forced to disinvest in the US. Such a disinvestment could take the shape of stock market sell-offs, and dumping of US treasuries and other instruments that could hit American markets.
Social media posts indicate that some in the Gulf are also realising that the top US priority seems to be to protect Israel. This, they say, is evident from how their ‘depleting’ air/ missile defence assets and missiles stocks are being ignored, leaving them to fend for themselves, while Tel Aviv’s needs are being met first.
This war may also have an impact on Europe, for example, as the US has given India a 30-day waiver (to begin with) to purchase Russian oil. With the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the demand for Russian oil and gas could bring Moscow a huge windfall, fuelling its military campaign in Ukraine.
While countries such as Pakistan must be increasingly concerned about rising oil prices and the possible fall in remittances, Europe, the Far East and South East Asia in particular, and the US in general, will not remain immune from the impact of rising energy prices, which may become a compelling reason to end the war.
TWO nights ago, I logged on to our evening meeting the way I have done twice a day, five days a week for nearly six weeks. On my screen: half a dozen faces I have come to think of as family, based in Beirut.
News was coming in of an impending Israeli bombing. They were scrambling — checking phones, calling relatives, trying to locate family members — and simultaneously, they were working. Editing, producing, filming. Because the news goes on.
I sat in Islamabad, safe, watching them hold themselves together from across a screen. The friction was unbearable. A war brews in my backyard too, and yet there I was, untouched, while they split themselves in two — one half terrified, one half professional — because that is what survival looks like when the bombs have been falling, on and off, your entire life.
I thought of the last time I was in Lebanon in 2009. My friend Shaan and I travelled the length and breadth of the country for two weeks, lost half the time, pre-Google Maps, finding our way through broken Arabic, French, English, and the extraordinary generosity of strangers.
We walked into a Hezbollah stall, a kind of travelling museum of resistance, and, upon hearing we were from Pakistan, were treated like long-lost friends. These young men walked us through posters and literature about Israel’s war crimes in Lebanon and we left with a clearer perspective than we had arrived with.
That clarity is what enrages me most about the language coming out of Washington and Tel Aviv. Liberation. They use this word as if it is a gift they are delivering, wrapped in the rubble of apartment buildings, hospitals, schools. As if the people of Lebanon, of Gaza, of Iraq, of Vietnam etc. needed to be freed from something other than the bombs themselves.
There was no doubt who the aggressor was then. There’s no doubt now.
Who, exactly, have they liberated?
Ask Vietnam. After years of carpet bombing — more tonnage than was used in all of World War II — the United States left behind craters, Agent Orange, and a generation of children born with deformities. Vietnam rebuilt itself and became one of the fastest-growing economies in Asia. No thanks to its liberators. In Ho Chi Minh City, the War Remnants Museum stands as a document of what liberation looked like on the ground. Every American I took there told me they had not been given the full picture about their country’s role. The museum gave it to them.
Ask Iraq, where liberation arrived in 2003 and has not yet finished its work, two decades later, in a country dismembered by sectarian violence that did not exist at that scale before the liberators came.
Ask the people of Gaza — not awaiting liberation, but living under occupation, stripped of basic rights, stateless in the land they have always inhabited. In 2023, the former head of Israel’s Mossad, said it plainly: “There is an apartheid state here. In a territory where two people are judged under two legal systems, that is an apartheid state.”
And now ask Iran. ‘Someone’ struck a girls’ elementary school in Minab, southern Iran, apparently three times. Between 150 and 168 people were killed, most of them girls between seven and 12. America says it wouldn’t ‘deliberately’ strike a school yet here we are.
The word ‘liberation’ has been so disfigured by its use that it now means its opposite. In the language of the powerful, it means the freedom to destroy without consequence.
Watching us in Islamabad and my Beirut family on screen, I thought of that word ‘resilient’ which the Western press loves to apply to people who have no choice but to survive. It is not a compliment. It is an observation made from a safe distance by people who will never have to be it. ‘Resilient’ is what you are called when no one comes to help you.
The men at the Hezbollah stall told us about Pakistan with more warmth and political precision than most international commentators manage about us.
They talked about our corrupt politicians, our establishment, our client-state relationship with the very empires now bombing their neighbours. No mention of religion. No apocalyptic register. Just the logic of people who have learned that no one else is coming.
There was no doubt who the aggressor was then. There is no doubt now.
The demonstrations across the world are not complicated. They are people stating the obvious: you cannot bomb a civilian population into freedom. You cannot starve children into democracy. You cannot call it liberation when the liberated are not alive to receive it.
We will log on again tomorrow morning. And somewhere in Washington, someone will talk about Israel’s right to defend itself, and the word ‘liberation’ will hang in the air, waiting for the next country to be freed.
Kuwait has implemented a precautionary reduction in crude oil production and refining throughput after the ongoing attacks by Iran against the country and the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, Kuwait Petroleum Corporation (KPC) said on Saturday.
The cuts are another disruption for the global energy industry because of the US-Israeli war on Iran, as oil and gas storage at facilities in the Middle East Gulf rapidly fill.
Oil fields in Iraq have already cut production and Qatar declared force majeure on its huge volumes of gas exports, while the United Arab Emirates is most likely to cut next.
“In light of the ongoing aggression by the Islamic Republic of Iran against the State of Kuwait, including Iranian threats against safe passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, KPC has implemented a precautionary reduction in crude oil production and refining throughput as part of its risk management and business continuity strategy,” it said, adding that it would be “reviewed as the situation develops”.
The national oil company did not say by how much it had reduced output.
In February, Kuwait produced around 2.6 million barrels per day of crude oil.
The adjustment was strictly precautionary and would be reviewed as the situation develops, KPC said, and it remained ready to restore production levels once conditions allow.
The US-Israeli war on Iran has already spilled beyond Iran’s borders, as Tehran has responded by hitting Israel and Gulf Arab states hosting US military installations and Israel has launched fresh attacks in Lebanon after Hezbollah fired across the border.
In an interview with the Financial Times on Friday, Qatar’s Energy Minister Saad al-Kaabi said the country expected all Gulf energy producers to shut down exports within weeks if the Iran conflict continues and drives oil to $150 a barrel.
Eight days into the war between the United States–Israel coalition and Iran, the conflict has settled more firmly into a pattern that began to emerge over the previous 48 hours; a high-intensity confrontation fought largely through missiles, drones and proxy forces and widening steadily across multiple theatres. At the same time, quiet diplomatic activity gathered momentum to contain the widening fallout for the region.
The past 24 hours demonstrated that despite the scale of coalition air power deployed against Iran and its allies, Tehran’s asymmetric military capabilities remained largely intact and continued to shape the tempo of the war, along the area stretching from the Strait of Hormuz through Iraq to Lebanon, where attacks on American facilities, shipping lanes, and Israeli military positions have continued in a calibrated but persistent manner.
One demonstration of this capability was seen in the Strait of Hormuz on Saturday, when the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps confirmed that one of its drones had struck the Malta-flagged oil tanker Prima after it allegedly ignored repeated warnings. Videos circulating online showed a fire burning on the deck of the tanker while commercial shipping in the vicinity began diverting away from the narrow waterway. This underlined Tehran’s enduring ability to threaten traffic through one of the world’s most sensitive energy corridors even while under sustained aerial pressure.
The episode also carried a political undertone as US President Donald Trump had earlier promised that the US Navy would provide escorts for tankers transiting the Strait, along with political risk insurance to restore commercial confidence, but the assurances have not materialised as yet.
Iranian pressure was also visible across the Gulf. In Bahrain, several drone and cruise missile strikes were reported in residential areas located near facilities associated with US military presence. Although there were no confirmed casualties, American military transport aircraft were observed departing Muharraq airfield carrying personnel and equipment, suggesting that Washington has begun temporary evacuation measures from some of its positions after Iranian strikes on regional bases.
Smoke rises after an Iranian drone was intercepted over the Bahrain Financial Harbour towers, which houses the Israeli embassy, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Manama, Bahrain, March 6, 2026. — Reuters
Further north, Iraq remained in focus as an active theatre of the conflict. Drones struck the US Victoria Base in Baghdad while additional attacks targeted the headquarters used by Halliburton and KBR within the Basra oil complex, where fires were reported after the impacts. Iraqi resistance factions, particularly the Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada Brigades, entered into direct contact with US forces in the Mosul area, triggering retaliatory strikes by American Apache helicopters. Simultaneously, the Iraqi Resistance Coordination Committee issued warnings that any Israeli attack on Beirut’s southern suburbs would trigger retaliatory strikes against American and coalition diplomatic facilities in Iraq and neighbouring Gulf states. This was a clear indication that the war is steadily binding together several theatres, which until now had remained partially separate.
Inside Iran, meanwhile, the humanitarian cost of the campaign continued to mount. In the suburbs of Shiraz, a coalition strike reportedly hit an ambulance station and a nearby children’s playground, in which more than 20 civilians, including several children and medical personnel, perished. The incident adds to the growing strain already visible in the Iranian medical system, where hospitals have begun reporting shortages of essential medicines as the war enters its second week.
Smoke rises following an explosion, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 6, 2026. — Reuters
At the political level, Tehran attempted to signal a limited recalibration of its approach. President Masoud Pezeshkian announced that Iran would no longer attack neighbouring countries unless an attack on Iran originated from them, presenting the statement as evidence that Tehran’s principal military objectives, particularly damaging the hostile radar and sensor networks in the region, had already been achieved. Almost immediately, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps issued another statement that strikes against American and Israeli assets would continue regardless of their location, leading to confusion about Tehran’s policy on striking neighbours hosting US facilities.
Events on the ground also reinforced that ambiguity demonstrating that the military campaign continues largely independent of the diplomatic messaging directed toward regional capitals.
Reports from the Gulf indicate that Saudi Arabia has intensified contacts with Tehran in search of a possible de-escalatory framework. At the same time Riyadh invoked its Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement with Pakistan, signed in September 2025, triggering urgent high-level consultations between Saudi Defence Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman and Chief of Army Staff and Chief of Defence Forces Field Marshal Asim Munir to review coordination mechanisms under the pact, which stipulates that an attack on either party may be treated as an attack on both.
Meanwhile, several Gulf governments have continued to reassess the scale of their economic commitments to Washington. Investment plans worth tens of billions of dollars have reportedly been frozen as governments quietly review their exposure to a conflict that is increasingly threatening regional infrastructure and financial stability.
For the US, the military posture in the region has become heavier but also more defensive. Three carrier strike groups, USS Abraham Lincoln, USS Gerald R. Ford and USS George H.W. Bush, are now operating in the theatre, representing roughly a quarter of the navy’s deployable carriers. Yet officials privately acknowledge that the deployment is primarily intended to protect bases and shipping lanes rather than prepare for a large offensive operation.
The reason for augmenting the naval presence lies partly in the pace of the missile exchanges. Besides some of the US facilities getting badly bruised by Iranian attack, American interceptor stocks in forward Patriot and THAAD batteries have reportedly been heavily depleted after days of constant launches against Iranian drones and missiles, highlighting the financial and logistical strain of defending widely dispersed installations across the Gulf.
The most dramatic military development of the day, however, occurred on the Lebanese front, where Israel attempted an airborne special-forces raid into the town of Nabi Chit in the Bekaa Valley following hours of preparatory bombardment. According to multiple sources, the helicopters inserting the commandos were quickly engaged by Hezbollah fighters, who had anticipated the move. What followed were intense close-range clashes lasting several hours, after which Israeli aircraft carried out heavy bombardment to cover the withdrawal of the surviving forces. It is claimed that Israel lost at least 10 soldiers in the operation.
Hezbollah later released footage claiming to show the wreckage of an Israeli Apache helicopter shot down during the engagement, while also announcing that anti-tank missiles had destroyed a Merkava tank near the border area. Rockets were fired toward Israeli territory and drones targeted military installations, including the Talat al-Hamames site.
Whether the Israeli operation was intended as reconnaissance, retaliation or an attempt to re-establish deterrence remains unclear, but its outcome has already altered the tone of the northern front. Hezbollah leaders warned that any future ground incursion would result in retaliatory strikes deeper inside Israel itself.
Elsewhere, the conflict remains contained for now. Yemen’s Houthi movement has not yet entered the fighting despite repeated signals that it could do so if the war widens further. Along Iran’s western frontier, the possibility of Kurdish involvement appears to have receded after Kurdish leaders’ ambivalence towards a request from Washington to participate in operations against Iran following explicit warnings from Tehran. Although over the past couple of days, there were reports of exploratory incursions into Iran by some of the Kurdish factions.
Taken together, the events of the eighth day suggest that Iran was combining diplomatic signalling toward neighbouring states with continued asymmetric pressure on American and Israeli assets. Meanwhile, the US and Israel, despite military superiority, were increasingly confronted with the financial, logistical and political costs of sustaining a conflict that is steadily widening in both geography and consequence.
Header image: Smoke rises following an explosion, amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 7, 2026. — Reuters
The United States and Israel’s war with Iran could leave consumers and businesses worldwide facing weeks or months of higher fuel prices even if the week-old conflict ends quickly, as suppliers grapple with damaged facilities, disrupted logistics, and elevated risks to shipping.
The outlook poses a wider global economic threat, as well as a political vulnerability for US President Donald Trump leading into the midterm elections, with voters sensitive to energy bills and unfavourable to foreign entanglements.
“The market is shifting from pricing pure geopolitical risk to grappling with tangible operational disruption, as refinery shutdowns and export constraints begin to impair crude processing and regional supply flows,” JP Morgan analysts said in a research note on Friday.
The conflict has already led to the suspension of around a fifth of global crude and natural gas supply, as ships avoid the vital Strait of Hormuz between Iran and Oman amid Tehran’s retaliatory attacks.
Global oil prices have surged 24 per cent this week to over $90 a barrel and are on course for their steepest weekly gains since the pandemic, driving up fuel prices for consumers worldwide.
A nearly complete shutdown of the Strait means the region’s giant oil producers — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and Kuwait — have had to suspend shipments of as much as 140 million barrels of oil — equal to about 1.4 days of global demand — to global refiners.
Average monthly oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz as of June 2025. — Vortexa via Reuters
As a result, oil and gas storage at facilities in the Middle East Gulf are rapidly filling, forcing oil fields in Iraq to cut oil production and Kuwait and the UAE most likely to cut next, analysts, traders and sources said.
“At some point soon, everyone will also shut in if vessels do not come,” said a source with a state oil company in the region, who asked not to be named.
Oil fields forced to shut in across the Middle East as a result of the shipping disruptions could take a while to return to normal, said Amir Zaman, head of the Americas commercial team at Rystad Energy.
“The conflict could be ended, but it could take days or weeks or months, depending on the types of fields, age of the field, the type of shut-in that they’ve had to do before you can get production back up to what it once was,” he said.
Iranian forces, meanwhile, are targeting regional energy infrastructure — including refineries and terminals — forcing them to shut down too, with some of those operations badly damaged by attacks and in need of repairs.
Qatar declared force majeure on its huge volumes of gas exports on Wednesday after Iranian drone attacks and it may take at least a month to return to normal production levels, sources told Reuters.
Qatar supplies 20pc of global liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Saudi Aramco’s mammoth Ras Tanura refinery and crude export terminal, meanwhile, has also closed due to attacks, with no details on damage.
The White House has justified the attack on Iran, saying the country posed an imminent threat to the US, although it has not provided details. Trump has also said he was concerned about Iran’s efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon, which Tehran denies.
Danger in the Strait
A quick end to the war would soothe markets. But a return to pre-war supply and pricing could take weeks or months, depending on the extent of the damage to infrastructure and shipping.
“Considering physical damage due to Iranian strikes, so far we have not seen anything that would be considered structural, although the risk remains as long as the war continues,” said Joel Hancock, energy analyst, Natixis CIB.
The biggest question for energy supplies is how and when the Strait of Hormuz will become safe for shipping again.
Trump has offered naval escorts to oil tankers and promised US insurance support to vessels in the region. But safety in the waterway may be elusive, as Iran has the capacity to sustain drone attacks on shipping for months, intelligence and military sources have said.
The conflict could also encourage countries to top up their strategic petroleum reserves in the weeks and months after the conflict ends, by exposing the dangers of thin inventories. That would increase demand for oil, and support prices.
Global economic, political risk
In the meantime, the disruption in energy shipments is reverberating through supply chains and economies in import-reliant Asia, which sources 60pc of its crude oil from the Middle East.
In India, state-run Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals declared force majeure on gasoline export cargoes, sources said this week, joining a growing number of refineries in the region unable to fulfill sales contracts due to lack of supply.
At least two refineries in China have cut runs. China, a big supplier to the region, has asked refineries to suspend fuel exports.
Thailand has also suspended fuel exports, while Vietnam has suspended crude shipments.
Disruption has given Russia a boost.
Prices for Russian crude cargoes have risen as the US has given Indian refiners a 30-day waiver to buy Russian crude to substitute for lost Middle East supply.
In Japan, the No.2 global LNG importer, baseload power futures for Tokyo for the fiscal year starting in April jumped more than a third this week on the EEX in anticipation of higher fuel prices.
And in Seoul, drivers queued up at petrol stations in anticipation of rising pump prices.
For European consumers, the crisis in gas supplies and the higher prices are a double whammy. The region was hit the hardest by the disruption to gas supplies due to sanctions on Russian energy imports after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.
Europe turned to LNG imports to substitute for Russian pipeline gas. And Europe now needs to buy 180 more LNG cargoes than it did last year to fill gas storage to the levels needed before next winter.
The supply risks to the US are fewer, as the country has grown in recent years into the worlds largest oil and gas producer.
But US crude and fuel prices rise in tandem with international crude markets, so pump prices for gasoline and diesel are affected even if domestic supply is plentiful.
US average retail gasoline, for example, hit $3.32 a gallon nationally on Friday, up 34 cents over last week, according to AAA. Diesel prices, meanwhile, hit $4.33 a gallon, up from $3.76 a gallon a week ago.
Higher prices at the pump mark a major risk for Trump and his fellow Republicans as they head into midterm elections in November.
“Gasoline prices are psychologically powerful,” said Mark Malek, chief investment officer at Siebert Financial. “They are the inflation number that consumers see every single day.”
Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Saturday that his country would never surrender to Israel and the United States, as Middle East war entered its second week.
Iran’s enemies “must take their wish for the unconditional surrender of the Iranian people to their graves”, Pezeshkian said, in a speech broadcast on state TV.
Israel and the United States launched strikes against Iran on February 28, killing the Islamic republic’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and triggering a regional conflict.
Iran has since responded with missile and drone strikes on Israel and US interests in regional countries, mainly in the Gulf.
Pezeshkian is among three members of an interim leadership council that has been in charge of Iran since Khamenei’s killing.
During the speech, Pezeshkian apologised to neighbouring countries for Iran’s attacks across the region, saying that they would not be targeted unless attacks originated from them.
“I must apologise on my own behalf and on behalf of Iran to the neighbouring countries that were attacked by Iran,” he said.
“The interim leadership council agreed yesterday that no more attacks will be made on neighbouring countries and no missiles will be fired unless an attack on Iran originates from those countries. “
The announcement came as Iran continued to launch attacks in the region in response to US-Israeli strikes on Iran.
Donald Trump has plunged the United States into its most significant conflict in decades over a “feeling”. It’s not his political opponents saying this, but the White House itself.
Throughout the first week of the war with Iran, the US president has prioritised impulse and emotion over explanations and reasoning.
“I hope you’re impressed,” Trump, a former reality TV host, told an ABC News reporter on Thursday. “How do you like the performance?”
Official government accounts are posting clips on social media that present the military operation like a video game, often with sharp captions that would suit a blockbuster war film.
“This could be the first war ever launched based on vibes,” joked American comedian and talk show host Jimmy Fallon this week.
Journalists on Wednesday bombarded White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt with questions about what motivated US military intervention — which Trump oversaw from his luxury Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida.
She replied that the president had acted because he “had a good feeling that the Iranian regime was going to strike United States assets and our personnel in the region”.
‘Incoherent, immoral, arrogant’
Experts said the Trump administration has taken a new approach in how it has sought to justify and communicate the military action to the public.
Sean Aday, a public relations professor at George Washington University, said he has “never seen worse messaging in wartime from a US administration”.
“It’s been a combination of incoherent, immoral, arrogant, amateurish, and at times trafficked in outright fabrication,” he told AFP.
Aday contrasted it with ex-president George W. Bush’s attempts to justify the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, whose administration spent “nearly a year and a half trying to persuade the public it was necessary”.
Richard Haass, a former US diplomat, pointed to how Trump has largely ignored formal national security processes, “having spent the better part of the last year hollowing out the national security apparatus”.
The National Security Council, a body that helps the president shape his diplomatic and military strategy, has been significantly downsized since Trump returned to power in January 2025.
Marco Rubio now combines the roles of secretary of state and national security adviser — positions that were previously separate.
Contradictory comments
Trump has been vague about both the reason for entering a war with Iran and the objectives being pursued.
Instead of holding press conferences he has given several short phone interviews with reporters, producing a mosaic of contradictory comments.
And while his cabinet members state Washington is not seeking regime change, the US president has insisted that he should be involved in choosing Iran’s next supreme leader after the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Trump has also brushed aside economic concerns from the conflict which has driven up the price of gasoline — a potential vulnerability for his Republican party ahead of midterm elections this year.
A poll released on Wednesday by NBC shows that 52 per cent of US voters oppose the military action in Iran.
By contrast, the start of the war in Afghanistan in 2001 was met with strong approval, and the public initially supported the offensive launched in Iraq.
But on both Afghanistan and Iraq, negative opinions grew as the conflicts dragged on.
Airline pilots have faced escalating risks in recent years, from drone incursions to flight paths squeezed by conflict. Now, US-Israeli attacks on Iran are making the skies even more perilous and ratcheting up the pressure on those flying through them.
The outbreak of war in the Middle East has put hundreds of ballistic missiles and attack drones into the skies above some of the world’s busiest airports. Tehran’s retaliation against the United States and its allies has included hitting airports, grounding scores of flights from Dubai to Abu Dhabi. A trickle of rescue flights has made it through for thousands of stranded passengers.
Reuters spoke to eight pilots and more than a half-dozen aviation and security insiders who said the accumulation of conflicts — from Ukraine to Afghanistan and Israel — has increased the burden on pilots, forcing them to manage shrinking airspace and the wider use of military drones far from active war zones. That’s increased the strain on the mental health of pilots desperate to keep themselves and their passengers safe.
“We are not military pilots. We are not trained to deal with these kinds of threats in the air,” Tanja Harter, a pilot with Middle East experience and president of the European Cockpit Association, told Reuters.
The current crisis is the latest in a string of security threats the sector has faced over the years, she said, which could cause “fear and anxiety” for pilots. Airlines now often have peer programs to help, she said, adding as a pilot she would not want to “share airspace with missiles”.
Airspace safety has worsened in the last two-and-a-half years as conflicts have grown, industry experts said, through a combination of GPS spoofing — maliciously tricking planes about their position — and increased numbers of missiles and drones.
An Air France flight to bring stranded French nationals home from the United Arab Emirates turned back due to missile fire on Thursday. A Lufthansa pilot on Friday diverted from Riyadh to Cairo over regional security fears.
Flying higher to avoid missiles
Middle East-trained pilots have become wearily used to emergencies, the head of Lebanon’s civil aviation body said. The escalating conflict put those skills to the test quickly. Video footage on March 5 showed planes taking off from Beirut airport as smoke billowed over buildings in the Lebanese capital.
“Middle East pilots have always faced crises, so from the start we trained how to deal with contingencies, emergencies and everything else,” said Captain Mohammed Aziz, director general of Lebanon’s civil aviation authority.
“No one can give you a guarantee that they won’t bomb the airport or will bomb the airport.”
One Middle East Airlines’ pilot with a decade of experience said routes to Beirut have become more complex. In the past, shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles in Lebanon usually had a range of 15,000 feet, so pilots would increase altitude to stay out of range, he said, while planes often carried extra fuel in case they were forced to divert.
Still, most missile strikes are far enough away not to be a risk and pilots are often too busy to worry about them.
“You’re actually busy enough on the plane trying to make sure you have clearance to land, that everything is in order, so you don’t have time to process your emotions over what’s happening outside the plane,” he said.
Drones disrupt European airports
The risks are not confined to the Middle East. Since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine, drones have become a key weapon on both sides. Airports in European cities from Stockholm to Munich have faced drone disruptions — suspected though not confirmed to be linked to the conflict.
Airline Captain Christian von D’Ahe, a commercial aircraft pilot for 15 years and head of the Danish Air Line Pilots Association, is alarmed by the emerging threat.
“Drones are not easily detected,” Von D’Ahe said. “We can see them in the air, and they’re very small. So sooner or later, something will happen.”
Drones striking an aircraft’s engines could cause total power loss, while damage to wings could compromise a jet’s ability to manoeuvre.
Most registered planes emit a signal via a transponder, a device that identifies aircraft to radar, but drones do not, leaving pilots in the dark. Regular radars used by airports struggle to catch drones. Specialised radar exists, but is typically operated by law enforcement or the military.
Dedrone, a company that produces counter-drone technology, said there were over 1.2 million drone violations in the US in 2025, with more expected in coming years.
‘There’s not much you can do’
Airports can use radar, frequency sensors and jamming tools to counter drones, while some systems can “spoof” them off course. But safety concerns mean airports cannot shoot drones down.
Tim Friebe, an air traffic controller in Germany and a vice president at the Air Traffic Controllers European Unions Coordination (ATCEUC), said drones were a “threat that is growing”, while airports often had limited options.
“For now we have reports, pilot reports, or sometimes controllers spot drones. The problem is there’s not much you can do except shutting down the airport,” he said.
Drones shut down some of the world’s biggest airports from Munich to London’s Gatwick last year, driving operators to beef up their foreign object and drone detection systems, according to half a dozen industry officials.
Moritz Burger, a commercial pilot based in Germany, recalled spotting an object that looked like a balloon with a structure underneath as he was about to land at a European airport.
“I was looking out of the window and suddenly there appeared an object that passed by just below our aircraft. We could see it for maybe one, maximum two seconds,” he said, adding it startled him and left him no time to take any evasive action.
“When you encounter such a near-miss or some passing object, there is not enough time to react. So it is unrealistic to expect that pilots could fly around such an object. There’s pretty much nothing we can do.”
Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) and Chief of the Army Staff (COAS) Field Marshal Asim Munir met with Saudi Defence Minister Khalid bin Salman Al Saud in Saudi Arabia on Saturday to discuss the ongoing Middle East conflict and Iran’s attacks on Saudi Arabia.
A statement by the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) issued on Saturday said that the CDF visited the Kingdom and met with the defence minister.
The two “discussed the gravity of the security situation accruing from Iranian drone and missile attacks on the Kingdom”, as well as joint measures needed to halt them within the framework of the strategic mutual defence agreement signed by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia last year.
According to the statement, it was emphasised that unprovoked aggression undermined efforts for regional security and stability and foreclosed options for the peaceful settlement of disputes.
“Both sides expressed hope and desire that brotherly country Iran would manifest prudence and sagacity to avoid any miscalculation and strengthen the hands of friendly countries seeking peaceful settlement of the crisis,” the ISPR added.
Earlier, Al Saud had posted on social media platform X about the meeting. He urged Iran to “exercise wisdom and avoid miscalculation”, following repeated missile and drone launches at the kingdom.
After meeting with Pakistan’s military chief, the Saudi minister posted on X: “We discussed Iranian attacks on the Kingdom and the measures needed to halt them … We stressed that such actions undermine regional security and stability and expressed hope that the Iranian side will exercise wisdom and avoid miscalculation.”
The two countries have long shared a multifaceted relationship rooted in strategic military cooperation, mutual economic interests, and shared Islamic heritage. These ties have encompassed economic assistance and energy supplies, with Riyadh being a significant source of financial aid and oil for Islamabad.
On Tuesday, Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar disclosed that Pakistan’s diplomatic intervention helped deter heavier Iranian strikes on Saudi Arabia, amid ongoing missile and drone barrages targeting United States military bases and allied facilities across the Gulf.
A day later, Pakistan formally requested that Saudi Arabia provide an alternative oil supply route through Yanbu to maintain its fuel supply chain in the wake of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz following the US-Israeli attack on Iran.
In September of last year, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman signed a “Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement” in Riyadh, pledging that any attack on either nation would be treated as an act of aggression against both.
WITH looming energy shortages due to the US-Israel war on Iran, the government has revived a range of Covid-era measures — excluding health-related precautions — to conserve fuel, along with a shift to weekly petroleum price revisions for market stability.
The decision reflects the gravity of the regional crisis. With the war entering its second week, devouring the Gulf region and disrupting shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz, Islamabad appears to be bracing for energy shortages and the economic fallout from oil price hike that are likely to follow.
Pakistan’s heavy reliance on imported energy leaves it acutely vulnerable to external shocks. Nearly all of its petroleum requirements are met through imports, much of which pass through one of the world’s most important maritime routes. Disruptions to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a corridor that carries roughly a fifth of global oil supplies, are not only tightening fuel availability but also driving up prices in international energy markets.
For a country already struggling with a fragile external account, even a modest increase in freight costs, insurance rates and ‘war premiums’ being charged by shipping companies can translate into significant financial pressure and rapidly drain its meagre foreign exchange reserves. The combination of higher insurance costs, limited shipping availability and increased competition for cargoes in Asian markets could make it harder for Pakistan to secure supplies in the coming weeks.
In this context, the government’s plan to revive such demand-management steps from the Covid era as work-from-home arrangements, distance learning and carpooling is crucial to conserve fuel and foreign exchange, given that the war may not end soon. Seemingly drastic, these steps nevertheless reflect a recognition that early restraint can limit disruptive interventions.
Equally notable is the shift from fortnightly to weekly petroleum price adjustments to pass through fluctuations in global prices and logistics costs more rapidly. Although this could mean more frequent changes at the pump for consumers, the alternative — large price distortions — could destabilise supply chains and discourage imports by oil marketing companies. At the same time, strict enforcement against hoarding and illegal storage is essential to prevent artificial shortages.
Ultimately, however, the present situation exposes a deeper structural vulnerability: Pakistan’s overwhelming dependence on imported fossil fuels. Each regional crisis, whether political or economic, morphs into domestic instability because we lack adequate energy buffers and strategic reserves.
While emergency steps may help navigate the present turbulence, the longer-term lesson is the same. Pakistan must step up efforts to diversify its energy mix, expand domestic resources and build larger strategic fuel reserves. Without such reforms, every external shock will continue to place the economy and ordinary people on an increasingly precarious footing.
