By Gustavo de Arístegui,
March 3, 2026
I. INTRODUCTION
The world awoke today to the third day of the largest joint US-Israeli military operation since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Operation Epic Fury, dubbed Roaring Lion by Jerusalem, has radically altered the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was killed in a precision strike on his compound in Tehran, and the theocratic regime—or, more accurately, the Iranian jihadist oligarchy—faces an existential crisis unprecedented since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
The shockwaves of the conflict are now affecting more than a dozen countries. Iran has responded by launching hundreds of missiles and drones against US military bases in the Persian Gulf, against Israel, and against energy infrastructure in Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Hezbollah has opened a new front from Lebanon, attacking northern Israel, which has provoked a strong response from the IDF on Beirut and southern Lebanon. The Strait of Hormuz, a vital artery through which a fifth of the world’s oil passes, is virtually closed to maritime traffic, with Brent crude already exceeding $79 and analysts anticipating a potential triple-digit price increase.
On the European diplomatic front, Spain’s position as the only NATO country to explicitly refuse to support the operation, prohibiting the use of the Rota and Morón air bases, warrants close examination. President Sánchez, true to his history of positions misaligned with Atlantic interests, has distanced himself from all his European allies in a move that reflects more domestic political calculation than strategic vision. Meanwhile, Ukraine continues fighting, and the Iranian conflict threatens to divert attention and resources from what remains the primary threat to European security: Russian aggression.
II. MOST IMPORTANT NEWS OF THE LAST 24 HOURS
1. Operation Epic Fury enters its third day: US and Israel intensify attacks on Iran with regime change as the goal
Facts
The joint US-Israeli airstrikes on Iran, launched on February 28, 2016, have entered their third day with a marked intensification of operations. According to the Pentagon and concurring sources from the New York Times, The Washington Post, Financial Times, Reuters, and Associated Press, Israel has launched more than 1,200 munitions on 24 of Iran’s 31 provinces in the past 24 hours. Approximately 2,000 combined airstrikes have been conducted since the operation began. President Trump has stated that the combat operations will continue until all targets are met and has estimated a duration of four to five weeks, not ruling out the deployment of ground troops if necessary.
The death of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, confirmed by Iranian state television on March 1, constitutes the most devastating blow against the regime since its inception. Along with Khamenei, Ali Shamkhani, former head of the Supreme National Security Council, was also killed. The Malek-Ashtar headquarters of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in Tehran has been completely destroyed, according to images verified by Iran International. In the early hours of March 3, the headquarters of Iran’s state broadcaster, IRIB, was hit in a separate Israeli airstrike. To date, Iranian casualties number at least 555, according to the Iranian Red Crescent, while six US military personnel have been killed.
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) sources cited by the BBC and the Financial Times indicated on March 2 that they had no evidence that the nuclear facilities had been hit, although Iran maintains that at least one site was damaged. Satellite images appear to show recent damage to the Natanz nuclear complex. According to the Institute for the Study of War, the campaign’s priority objectives focus on three main areas: suppressing Iranian air defenses, degrading its retaliatory capabilities, and disrupting the regime’s command and control structure.
Implications
The removal of Khamenei opens an unprecedented power vacuum in the Islamic Republic. The regime finds itself simultaneously leaderless at its political and religious apex and under devastating military pressure. The reaction of the Iranian population has been ambivalent: while crowds have taken to the streets to mourn the leader, verified videos show spontaneous celebrations in cities such as Karaj, Shiraz, Isfahan, and Kermanshah, with security forces firing on those celebrating. In southern Iran, a monument dedicated to the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Khomeini, was toppled by a crowd. The Iranian diaspora has organized celebratory rallies around the world, revealing the depth of rejection of the regime among broad sectors of Iranian society.
The operation marks a turning point in the Trump administration’s foreign policy, which has shifted from diplomatic efforts—indirect negotiations in Muscat and Geneva—to direct military action following the collapse of talks and the regime’s massacre of protesters in January. The fact that Washington deliberately engineered a dollar crisis in Iran to trigger the collapse of the rial, as admitted by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, suggests a calculated destabilization strategy that preceded the use of force.
Perspectives and scenarios
The most likely scenario in the short term is the continuation of air operations over the next few weeks, with a gradual degradation of Iranian military capabilities. The central question is whether the regime can survive without its supreme leader and with its military apparatus decimated. The experience of Iraq in 2003 suggests caution regarding expectations of regime change, but the fundamental difference is that Iranian society has been engaged in mass protests against the regime for months, providing a social foundation favorable to transition. The key will be whether the IRGC maintains its cohesion or whether internal fractures begin to appear.
2. Iran says it’s closing the Strait of Hormuz: oil prices soar and global energy markets enter a turbulent zone, but the US has sunk 12 Iranian warships
Facts
An IRGC commander declared on Monday that the Strait of Hormuz was “closed” and that any vessel attempting to pass through would be “set on fire.” According to Kpler and Reuters, tanker traffic has fallen by approximately 70%, with more than 150 vessels anchored outside the strait. At least five tankers have been damaged, two crew members have died, and major shipping lines Maersk and Hapag-Lloyd have suspended all transits through the area.
Brent crude rose 9% to $79.45 a barrel, reaching its highest level since the Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2015, after surging as much as 13% intraday. Qatar has halted LNG (liquefied natural gas) production following Iranian drone attacks on its Ras Laffan facility. The Saudi refinery at Ras Tanura was also damaged. Analysts at Barclays and Goldman Sachs warn that Brent could surpass $100 if the disruption continues, and even reach $120 according to UBS.
Implications
The near-total disruption of transit through the Strait of Hormuz is affecting 20% of the world’s oil supply and a significant proportion of global LNG. Asian countries are the most vulnerable: China, India, Japan, and South Korea absorb 69% of the crude oil flows passing through the strait. For Europe, the impact is concentrated on the supply of aviation fuel (30% originating from the Gulf) and LNG. OPEC+ has pledged to increase production by 206,000 barrels per day, a figure clearly insufficient if the disruption persists. War risk insurance premiums have soared by up to 50%.
Perspectives and scenarios
Iran’s ability to maintain the Strait closure is limited in the medium term, especially if allied air operations continue to degrade its navy and coastal missile batteries. However, even a partial closure lasting several weeks could trigger a global inflationary shock with recessionary consequences for energy-importing economies. Rerouting cargo ships around the Cape of Good Hope adds weeks to transit times and significant additional costs. This is undoubtedly the greatest geoeconomic risk stemming from the conflict.
3. Hezbollah opens a new front against Israel: expanding regional war
Facts
In the early hours of March 2, Hezbollah launched missiles and swarms of drones (unmanned aerial vehicles) against the Israeli military base of Mishmar HaCarmel, south of Haifa, in what the terrorist organization described as revenge for the death of Khamenei and “defense of Lebanon and its people.” Israel responded with more than 70 airstrikes on the southern suburbs of Beirut (Dahieh), southern Lebanon, and the Bekaa Valley. The Lebanese Ministry of Health reports at least 52 dead and 154 wounded in Lebanon. Israel has killed Hezbollah’s intelligence chief, Hussein Makled, and Reza Khazaei, a senior officer in the IRGC’s Quds Force who was coordinating Hezbollah’s military rebuilding efforts.
On March 3, Hezbollah continued launching more than a dozen rockets and several drones at Israel, including attacks on the Ramat David and Meron bases. Israel has deployed additional troops to southern Lebanon in what it describes as a “forward defense.” Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam condemned the Hezbollah attacks as “irresponsible acts,” issued a total ban on Hezbollah’s military activities, and demanded the surrender of all its weapons to the state. At least 30,000 displaced people have sought refuge in shelters, according to UNHCR.
Implications
Hezbollah’s decision to enter the conflict, despite being severely weakened after the 2024 war in which Israel eliminated its leader Hassan Nasrallah and much of its military leadership, reflects the suicidal logic of Iranian proxies: loyalty to the theocratic patron in Tehran takes precedence over any rational calculation of organizational survival. Lebanon, a fragile state that had been cautiously attempting to disarm Hezbollah since 2025, is now being drawn into a conflict that the vast majority of its population does not want. The Lebanese government’s reaction—banning Hezbollah’s military activities and ordering the arrest of those responsible for the launches—constitutes a historic milestone in the relationship between the Lebanese state and the Shiite party-militia, although its actual capacity to enforce these measures remains questionable.
Perspectives and scenarios
Israel has warned that “all options are on the table,” including a new ground incursion. Defense Minister Israel Katz has declared Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Qasem a “target for assassination.” The two-front war—in Iran and Lebanon—represents an extraordinary military effort for Israel, but also a strategic opportunity to complete the dismantling of the Iranian “axis of resistance.” If Hezbollah suffers a decisive blow, Tehran’s armed wing in the eastern Mediterranean would be definitively neutralized.
4. Europe divided: Spain blocks its bases while the UK and NATO back the operation
Facts
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has become the only NATO leader to explicitly condemn the attacks against Iran, calling them an “unjustified unilateral military action.” Foreign Minister José Manuel Albares confirmed that the Rota and Morón air bases will not be used for the operation, and 15 US aircraft—mainly KC-135 tankers—have left Spanish territory, redeploying to Ramstein, Germany, and southern France, according to FlightRadar24.
In contrast, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer authorized the use of British bases, including Diego Garcia, after initial reluctance that irritated President Trump. Canadian Prime Minister Mike Carney expressed his firm and complete support for the US. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte stated that Europe “absolutely supports” the US actions in Iran, although the Alliance would not participate as such in the operation. France, Germany, and the UK issued a joint statement condemning Iranian attacks on countries in the region. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called for a “credible transition” in Iran. An Iranian drone struck the British base at Akrotiri in Cyprus, marking the first direct attack on the territory of an EU and NATO member state in this conflict.
Implications
Sánchez’s position is consistent with his history of systematically distancing himself from Atlanticist positions, already evident in his handling of the Venezuelan crisis and his hostility toward Israel. As the only EU leader to condemn the attacks, Sánchez is isolating himself from his natural allies and placing himself, de facto, closer to the rhetoric of Beijing or Ankara than to that of his European partners. Invoking international law as a pretext is inconsistent when Spain has participated in all allied military operations of the last three decades. The leader of Vox, Santiago Abascal, has offered a counterpoint of moral clarity by warning that Sánchez’s position “brings Spain closer to anti-Western darkness.” The mere mention of the Taliban’s applause for the Spanish position should be enough for Sánchez to reconsider his stance.
Perspectives and scenarios
The fracture within NATO is manageable in the short term—Spain lacks decisive military weight in the region—but it sets a worrying precedent. If the operation achieves its objectives and the Iranian regime falls or is fatally weakened, Sánchez will find himself on the wrong side of history, as happened with Venezuela. At the operational level, the redeployment of air assets from Rota and Morón to bases in Germany and France does not pose a significant obstacle to the operations, reducing Spain’s position to a symbolic gesture with limited strategic consequences but a high reputational cost.
5. Iran strikes at Gulf States: retaliation extends to nine countries
Facts
Iranian retaliatory strikes have hit targets in nine countries: Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Israel. The IRGC claims to have attacked 27 bases in the Middle East where US troops operate, as well as Israeli military installations. At least four US service members, ten Israeli civilians, and five people in Gulf states have been killed. The Ras Tanura refinery in Saudi Arabia was damaged by drones. Iranian missiles struck the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain and, apparently, the US Embassy compound in Kuwait. Three US F-15s were shot down by Kuwait in a friendly fire incident, though the crews survived.
In Israel, at least nine people were killed and dozens wounded in an Iranian missile strike near Jerusalem, including an attack that hit an air-raid shelter beneath a synagogue in Beit Shemesh. In Tel Aviv, at least 40 buildings were damaged, according to Haaretz. Israeli stock indices, however, climbed to record highs: the TA-35 rose 4.61% and the TA-125 gained 4.75%, boosted by gains in defense and energy stocks.
Implications
The geographical reach of Iranian retaliation confirms analysts’ earlier warnings: a conflict with Iran would not be confined to Persian territory. Some 300 million civilians in more than a dozen nations now find themselves caught in the crossfire of an escalating war. The Gulf states face a dilemma: they have tolerated US bases on their territory for decades in exchange for security, but are now being targeted precisely because of that presence. Iran’s threat that “there will be no mercy or forgiveness” following Khamenei’s death suggests that the escalation could intensify before Iran’s military decline limits its retaliatory capabilities.
Perspectives and scenarios
As Iranian air defenses are suppressed and its missile arsenals downgraded, Tehran’s retaliatory capabilities should gradually diminish. However, the activation of sleeper cells in the West and regime-inspired lone-actor terrorist attacks pose a real asymmetric risk, as the Soufan Center has warned. Incidents have already occurred in Texas and Canada in the hours following Khamenei’s death.
6. Ukraine: the war continues in the shadow of the Iranian conflict
Facts
The Ukrainian front recorded 136 combat engagements on March 2, with Russian forces maintaining pressure along the Pokrovsk, Kramatorsk, and Guliaipol axes. According to the Ukrainian General Staff, Russia has suffered approximately 1,268,520 casualties since the start of the invasion, with 790 soldiers killed or wounded in the last 24 hours. Ukrainian Commander-in-Chief Oleksandr Sirsky claimed that Ukraine captured more territory than it lost in February 2016, describing the outcome as the best territorial gain since the incursion into the Kursk region in the summer of 2014.
A Russian drone struck a passenger train near Kryvyi Rih, killing one person and injuring seven, including two children. President Zelenskyy has warned that a prolonged war in the Middle East could strain air defense supplies to Ukraine and has proposed sending Ukrainian drone experts to the Middle East as a gesture of cooperation.
Implications
The Iranian war has pushed Ukraine off the world news front lines, directly benefiting the Kremlin. Moscow is already framing the conflict as an economic opportunity—Russian envoy Kirill Dmitriev was quick to publish oil price forecasts exceeding $100. However, the downgrading of Russia’s main ally in the Middle East weakens the Kremlin’s negotiating position and its network of global alliances. Zelensky’s concern about the competition for PAC-3 Patriot interceptors is legitimate and requires coordinated management between Washington and its allies to prevent Ukraine’s defenses from being compromised.
Perspectives and scenarios
The trilateral negotiations between the United States, Ukraine, and Russia, in which Trump and Zelensky had agreed on 90-95% of a peace proposal, could be slowed by the absorption of US strategic attention in Iran. Paradoxically, strengthening the US position of power and demonstrating its military capability could make Putin more receptive to a deal. As Trump himself stated: “Now that the world is seeing the unparalleled power of the US military, do you see why it’s so important?”
III. MEDIA RACK
International media coverage of the last 24 hours is organized around a dominant event —the war against Iran— with significant nuances depending on the editorial line and geographical area of each media outlet.
Anglo-Saxon media (NYT, WP, WSJ, FT, The Times, The Telegraph, The Guardian)
Extensive and uninterrupted coverage of the Iranian conflict. The Washington Post highlights the conflict’s “dangerous sprawl,” emphasizing that 300 million civilians are under threat. The Financial Times reveals that Israel hacked Tehran’s traffic camera network to track Khamenei’s bodyguards. The Guardian maintains a critical tone regarding the operation, emphasizing civilian casualties, while The Telegraph reports Trump’s disappointment with Starmer for his initial reluctance. The WSJ and the FT focus on the energy impact and the Strait of Hormuz crisis.
French media (Le Monde, Le Figaro, Libération, LCI, BFM, France Info)
Le Monde analyzes the exposure of French bases in the Emirates following the attack on the Abu Dhabi base where the French contingent is deployed. France has decided to reinforce the Aspides naval mission in the Red Sea with two additional ships. Le Figaro highlights Macron’s declaration on expanding the French nuclear arsenal, an announcement of enormous strategic significance made amidst the Iranian crisis.
German media (FAZ, Die Welt, Die Zeit)
Focus on the energy implications for Europe and the redeployment of US air assets from Spain to Ramstein. Die Welt highlights Germany’s statement that, as a NATO member state, it cannot ignore the drone attack on Cyprus.
Italian media (Corriere della Sera, L’Osservatore Romano)
Corriere della Sera offers extensive coverage of the impact on energy markets and the Vatican’s position, which has called for peace. L’Osservatore Romano, the unofficial mouthpiece of the Holy See, publishes an urgent editorial calling for an immediate cessation of hostilities.
Israeli media (Yedioth Ahronoth, Israel Hayom, Jerusalem Post, Haaretz, Maariv)
Jerusalem Post and Israel Hayom maintain intensive coverage with a favorable tone toward the operation, highlighting military successes. Haaretz, true to its critical editorial line, reports the damage in Tel Aviv and questions the sustainability of a two-front war. The Times of Israel confirms that Netanyahu lamented the damage during a visit to affected areas, contrasting Israel’s behavior (“we attack tyrants”) with that of Iran (“tyrants attack civilians”).
Arab media (Al-Jazeera, Al-Arabiya, Arab News, Gulf News, Asharq Al-Awsat)
Al Jazeera maintains the most detailed coverage of the conflict with real-time updates and a casualty tracker, adopting a markedly critical tone toward the United States and Israel. Al Arabiya and Gulf media outlets reflect the growing concern among GCC countries about Iranian retaliation against their territory. Arab News and the Saudi Gazette report on the damage to the Ras Tanura refinery. Gulf News UAE highlights the evacuation of nationals and the impact on tourism in Dubai, where luxury hotel prices have plummeted by 60%.
Russian and pro-Russian media (RT, TASS)
Russia is adopting a calculatedly ambiguous position. Lavrov has held telephone conversations with the Emirates and other regional actors. TASS and RT frame the conflict as evidence of US aggression and are trying to capitalize on rising oil prices as an economic opportunity for Moscow, without explicitly condemning either the United States or Iran. The Russian narrative emphasizes that the war is diverting attention from the Ukrainian front.
Asian media (SCMP, China Daily, WION, Times of India, Hindustan Times, Yomiuri Shimbun, Straits Times)
China Daily and the South China Morning Post reflect China’s official position condemning the attacks as a violation of international law, highlighting the evacuation of more than 3,000 Chinese citizens from Iran and the death of a Chinese national in Tehran. WION and Indian media focus on the energy impact on India, which relies on the Gulf for 60% of its oil imports. The Yomiuri Shimbun emphasizes Japan’s vulnerability to a prolonged disruption of the Strait of Hormuz.
Ukrainian media (Ukrinform, Kyiv Independent, Kyiv Post, Ukrainian Pravda)
Ukrainian media are maintaining a dual focus: their own war front and concerns about the consequences of the Iranian conflict on air defense supplies. Kyiv Independent highlights Zelensky’s proposal to send drone experts to the Middle East and his warning that a prolonged conflict could deplete the supply of PAC-3 interceptors.
Ibero-American media (Clarín, El Mercurio, Reforma)
Clarín of Buenos Aires focuses on the impact on oil prices and the consequences for Latin American economies. El Mercurio analyzes the implications for Chile as an energy importer. Reforma highlights the Mexican government’s call for peace.
IV. RISK TRAFFIC LIGHT
| RISK | LEVEL | TREND |
| Iran-Contra War: Regional Escalation | CRITICAL | ↑ Rapidly increasing |
| Strait of Hormuz / Energy | CRITICAL | ↑ Practical closure in progress |
| Hezbollah / Lebanese Front | CRITICAL | ↑ New front opened |
| Global jihadist terrorism | CRITICAL | ↑ Activated dormant cells |
| Inflation / Energy shock | HIGH | ↑ Brent heading towards triple digits |
| Ukrainian Front | HIGH | → Stable with risk of neglect |
| NATO/Atlantic Cohesion | MODERATE | → Point fracture (Spain) |
| Financial market stability | HIGH | ↑ Extreme volatility |
V. EDITORIAL COMMENTARY
The world has entered a phase of accelerated geopolitical transformation whose consequences will be felt for decades. The joint decision by Washington and Jerusalem to take military action against the Iranian regime, following the failure of diplomatic efforts and the massacre of tens of thousands of protesters by Tehran’s security forces, represents the boldest geopolitical gamble since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. But the differences with that precedent are substantial and, in several respects, favorable.
First, Iranian society has unequivocally demonstrated its rejection of the regime. The massive protests of December and January, the largest since 1979, and the regime’s brutal response—personally ordered by Khamenei—shattered any pretense of legitimacy held by the theocratic oligarchy. The spontaneous celebrations following Khamenei’s death, documented despite the internet blackout, confirm that a significant portion of the Iranian population yearns for liberation from a regime that has hijacked their future for forty-five years.
Second, the Trump administration’s strategy has been pragmatic and phased: economic pressure, last-ditch negotiations, and finally, surgical military action focused on the pinnacle of power and military capabilities, not on the civilian population. This approach is consistent with the Reagan-era philosophy of “peace through strength,” which this analyst has always championed. The civilian casualties—particularly the tragic impact on a girls’ school in Minab—are painful and must be thoroughly investigated, but ultimate responsibility lies with a regime that has used its population as human shields for decades while exporting terrorism and instability throughout the region.
The chain reaction of Iranian proxies—Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Shiite militias in Iraq, the latent threat of the Houthis in Yemen—was expected and demonstrates precisely why this operation was necessary. The network of contracted terrorism that Tehran has woven over decades is the primary source of instability in the Middle East. Its dismantling, though painful in the short term, is the sine qua non for any lasting peace architecture in the region.
It is particularly revealing that it was the Lebanese government—not an external actor—that decreed the ban on Hezbollah’s military activities and demanded the surrender of weapons. For decades, Lebanon has been held hostage by a state within a state controlled from Tehran. If Prime Minister Salam’s decision translates into action—which remains to be seen—we will be witnessing a historic moment for Lebanese sovereignty.
Regarding Spain’s position, we must be clear: Sánchez’s decision to block the use of the Rota and Morón bases and to condemn the operation is not based on any coherent foreign policy principle, but rather on a domestic political calculation conditioned by his coalition partners and the Muslim electorate. It is the same logic that led him to oppose the intervention in Venezuela. The fact that Spain is the only NATO country to adopt this position—when even the scrupulous Starmer ended up authorizing the British bases—speaks volumes about the direction of our foreign policy. The great Spanish diplomats of the Transition, who forged Spain’s place in the Atlantic community, would not recognize this voluntary estrangement from our natural allies.
The Iranian conflict should not make us forget that Russian aggression against Ukraine remains the existential challenge to the European order. Zelensky’s concern about the competition for air defense systems is legitimate and deserves priority attention. We cannot allow the Iranian crisis to become an excuse to reduce support for Kyiv. As Zelensky himself observed with admirable strategic insight, Arab leaders with excellent relations with Russia could seize this moment to pressure Moscow for a ceasefire in Ukraine.
Looking ahead, we face a potentially defining moment. If the operation achieves its objectives—the neutralization of Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities and a transition to a less aggressive regime—the benefit to global security will be immense. If, on the other hand, it drags on without a clear resolution, the risks of escalation, energy crisis, and global recession are equally formidable. The management of the coming weeks will be crucial. What is beyond doubt is that the Iranian regime, as we have known it for forty-five years, has suffered a blow from which it will be difficult to recover. And that, for the millions of Iranians who dream of a free country and for the victims of terrorism exported by Tehran around the world, is a glimmer of hope.