Despite intensifying strikes, the Iran war may still move toward a ceasefire. Energy market pressure, Gulf diplomacy, Iranian missile capabilities, succession politics in Tehran and Washington’s strategic choices will determine whether the conflict widens or stabilises.
The war on Iran is entering a dangerous phase. From disruption in the Strait of Hormuz to potential attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure and aviation hubs, several scenarios could shake global oil markets, shipping routes and regional security across West Asia.
While the U.S. and Israel have a dizzying array of strategic goals, ranging from Iran’s military weakening, change within the regime and regime change, Iran simultaneously follows two broad approaches which aim at forcing the U.S. to throw in the towel and allowing the Islamic Republic to survive.
U.S. and Israeli strikes are degrading Iran’s missile launchers and military infrastructure, but intelligence gaps, rising civilian casualties and uncertain missile stockpiles raise questions about how durable the campaign’s gains will be.
Just two years ago, the Libyan National Army (LNA) was widely treated as an international pariah. Western capitals explored ways to weaken it and diplomatic engagement was limited.
Today, that picture looks increasingly outdated.
Strikes near Kuwait and Dubai, U.S. casualties, and threats to Gulf energy routes signal a dangerous widening of the U.S.–Israel war on Iran. From Strait of Hormuz disruption to oil price shock and regional proxy escalation, the conflict is testing worst-case scenarios.
A coordinated Arab and Gulf diplomatic push failed to stop U.S. alignment with Israel’s war on Iran. With escalation underway, scenarios now range from short, high-intensity strikes to a prolonged regional conflict. The risk of state collapse and energy market shock is no longer theoretical.
