ConflictClarifier

Rastreador de la Crisis Irán-Golfo 2026
CC
Events Archive
strikeApr 11, 2026

Unsettled and uncertain: What the Iran war means around the world as US and Iran enter talks

Summary

The long-term fallout of the war in Iran is only beginning to take shape, but this much is clear: The conflict has left the Middle East unsettled, alliances strained and the world facing uncertain shifts in the balance of economic and military power. Iran’s theocracy is tattered but alive, with new economic leverage. The U.S. and Israel will hold elections this year, their leaders potentially facing voters having fallen short of their war aims. The NATO alliance, already strained, is under even more pressure. The Gulf Arab states face an emboldened Iran in their backyard. At this inflection point, as the U.S. and Iran prepare for talks this weekend in Pakistan, AP journalists in the Middle East and Washington share their assessments on how the war is still reverberating across the world during the tenuous ceasefire: Israel If Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu were to be graded for the war, he would get an “incomplete.” Netanyahu set some ambitious goals at the outset of the fighting on Feb. 28, saying he wanted to remove the threats posed by Iran’s missile and nuclear programs and its support for hostile proxy groups. He also vowed to create the conditions for a popular uprising against the Iranian government. None of these goals were fully achieved. In a televised address after the ceasefire, Netanyahu acknowledged “we still have goals to complete.” But he nonetheless claimed “immense achievements.” “Iran is weaker than ever, and Israel is stronger than ever. This is the bottom line of this campaign,” he said. With elections looming later this year, the question for Netanyahu is whether the Israeli public agrees with his assessment. Israelis overwhelmingly supported the war against archenemy Iran, especially in the early days of the campaign. But as the war dragged on, Israelis also grew tired as nonstop air-raid sirens disrupted daily life and sent people scrambling into bomb shelters around the clock. Netanyahu is now hoping that in the coming ceasefire talks the U.S. will shore up the battlefield gains into a permanent agreement that guards Israel’s interests. He also must ensure that his relationship with President Donald Trump remains strong after an inconclusive war that was deeply unpopular in the U.S. Otherwise, Netanyahu could find himself struggling for his job when his war-weary nation heads to the polls. — Josef Federman, deputy news director for the Middle East Depleted Iran finds leverage Iran, battered by nationwide protests in January and heavy airstrikes in the war, suddenly finds itself in a position of power. Just the threat of sea mines and possible attacks from Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard has ships staying away from the Strait of Hormuz, in effect keeping the waterway crucial for international energy shipments closed. Even hard-liners have spun the killing of 86-year-old Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei into the idea of replacing him with a younger, more hard-line version of himself in his son, Mojtaba. The government has put forward its own maximalist demands ahead of the Islamabad talks — including continuing to enrich uranium in its nuclear program, one of the chief reasons Trump gave for going to war. Yet Iran’s military sites now sit in ruins, its missile arsenal broadly depleted, and the threat of more protests by its people still looms in the future. That unrest could be spurred on by the sheer level of destruction in Iran’s oil and gas industry, as well as attacks targeting steel mills and other economic sites. — Jon Gambrell, news director for the Gulf and Iran Gulf Arab states in the middle After insisting and pleading with Iran to leave them out of the conflict, the Gulf Arab states still found themselves targeted by Iran, which rained down drone and missile fire on airports, energy sites, military bases and civilian targets across the region. Many had to close refineries or declare themselves unable to meet their promised oil output due to the war. Even with a ceasefire in place, Iran’s new control of the Strait of Hormuz through threats alone means Gulf states still aren’t able to get their energy shipments out to market. They aren’t a monolith though, with opinions ranging from Oman’s efforts at diplomacy to the United Arab Emirates denouncing Iranian aggression and insisting the status quo cannot stand. — Jon Gambrell, news director for the Gulf and Iran Ceasefire uncertainty in Lebanon In Lebanon, the regional war has taken a devastating toll and the prospect of a ceasefire now leaves more questions than answers. The U.S. and Israel are at odds with Iran over whether or not their ceasefire extends to the war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran says it does; the U.S. and Israel say it does not. In the meantime, Lebanese and Israeli officials have agreed to enter into direct negotiations, which Lebanon hopes will lead to a ceasefire and Israel hopes will lead to disarmament of Hezbollah. Netanyahu said the negotiations would also include talks about a potential peace agreement between the two countries, which do not have diplomatic relations. While the talks represent a significant step, reaching an agreement will not be easy. Lebanon wants a halt to Israeli strikes before the talks start, a condition that Israel is unlikely to agree to. In practice, most analysts say Lebanon does not have the capacity to disarm Hezbollah by force or to enforce any ceasefire agreement that Hezbollah does not agree to. For now, the Israel-Hezbollah war that has displaced more than a million people and killed nearly 1,900 continues. — Abby Sewell, news director for Lebanon, Syria and Iraq Strained NATO relations pushed to the brink Trump has repeatedly tested the 32-member alliance. He cut off direct U.S. military assistance to Ukraine, threatened to take the Arctic territory of Greenland from NATO ally Denmark, and cajoled members to spend more on defense. Now, his differences with NATO allies over Iran are raising new questions about whether the alliance, created as a curative to post World War II instability, can survive. Since launching the war, Trump has derided allies as “cowards,” slammed NATO as “a paper tiger” and compared U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer to Neville Chamberlain, the former premier known for a policy of appeasement toward Nazi Germany. Trump is angry at member countries ignoring his call to help as Iran effectively shut the the Strait of Hormuz, and at alliance members Spain and France restricting the use of their airspace or joint military facilities by U.S. forces supporting the operations in Iran. Trump says the moment is “a mark on NATO that will never disappear.” — Aamer Madhani, White House reporter, Washington The United States faces economic woes Trump won back the White House promising to curb inflation, bring down prices many Americans saw as too high and trigger a jobs boom. The war in Iran has done exactly the opposite, raising gas prices, leaving stock markets reeling and sending shockwaves through the rest of the economy as the labor market weakens and inflation begins rising anew. With November’s midterms looming, none of that is good for Republicans trying to keep control of Congress. Trump initially tried to calm economic fears by visiting swing states. But he first scoffed at affordability worries as a hoax, then stopped those trips altogether as the war consumed his administration. Making a ceasefire stick might eventually stabilize oil prices and financial markets, but reversing economic pain around the globe may take far longer, potentially affecting voters closer to Election Day. Polling also shows that most Americans believe U.S. military action in Iran went too far. And the war has even caused a rift within Trump’s once seemingly unflappable MAGA base. — Will Weissert, White House reporter, Washington Energy prices and markets The conflict has largely shut down the flow of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, through which about one-fifth of the world’s oil travels, and has damaged oil and gas production facilities across the Middle East. In response, oil prices have shot higher all over the world. Brent crude oil, the international standard, has gone from roughly $70 per barrel before the war in late February to more than $119 at times. Brent rose 0.7% to $96.58 Friday. Prices at the pump have jumped as well, reaching about $4.15 a gallon in the U.S., up from just under $3 before the conflict began. Higher gas costs can sap Americans’ ability to spend on other goods and services, slowing the economy and threatening to worsen unemployment. U.S. consumer prices rose 3.3% in March from a year earlier, up sharply from just 2.4% in February and the biggest yearly increase since May 2024. The surge in gas prices will stretch the budgets of lower- and middle-income households. — Christopher Rugaber, economics reporter, Washington — AP writers Jonathan J. Cooper and Mike Catalini contributed.

Actors involved

USIsraelIranProxy

Sources

  • The Associated PressBy The Associated Press

    The long-term fallout of the war in Iran is only beginning to take shape, but this much is clear: The conflict has left the Middle East unsettled, alliances strained and the world facing uncertain shifts in the balance of economic and military power. Iran’s theocracy

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranUN
1 source

The US and its allies Britain, France and Germany are pushing other countries on the UN nuclear watchdog's board to pass a resolution next week reporting Iran to the UN Security Council for the first time in 20 years, diplomats said on Friday. If passed, the resolution would follow up on one adopted on June 12 of last year declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations for not fully cooperating with an investigation into uranium traces found at undeclared sites.

The US launched an air war against Tehran on February 28 in which, together with Israel, it destroyed or badly damaged Iran's uranium-enrichment facilities. Iran has not let International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors return to the bombed sites since then or verify what remains of its stocks of enriched uranium, some of which was enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from weapons grade.

Resolution would be culmination of standoff over IAEA's access to nuclear sites A resolution by the IAEA's 35-nation board reporting Iran to the Security Council would also be the culmination of a standoff over IAEA access to those sites, since the board has passed two resolutions in the past year demanding Iran declare its enriched uranium stocks and grant the IAEA full access to verify them.

A draft text for the resolution has yet to be formally submitted to the board and negotiations between countries over the exact wording are ongoing, diplomats said. A draft is usually formally submitted early in the week of a board meeting. As a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has the right to develop nuclear technology, including enrichment, for peaceful purposes.

Iran says it would never produce nuclear weapons. It is, however, the only country to enrich to 60% without making a bomb. The amount it has enriched to that level is "a matter of serious concern" to the IAEA. The IAEA believes well over 200 kg of that highly enriched uranium has survived the bombardments and is held in a tunnel complex at Isfahan and at the Natanz facility.

Location: Jerusalem
strikeUnverifiedUSIranChina
1 source

The U.S. Treasury imposed sanctions on the Turkish bank Golden Global Yatirim Bankasi Anonim Sirketi, alleging it facilitated the transfer of Iranian oil revenues into cash and gold. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stated these measures are part of "Operation Economic Outcast," an initiative launched following more than six months of conflict to pressure Iran.

Location: Iran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranEURussiaChinaUkraineHamas
1 source

Rabobank reported that geopolitical developments, including Russian statements regarding potential peace talks in Ukraine and US-Iran hostilities, continue to dominate market sentiment, though analysts noted these claims remain unverified. The bank also cited unconfirmed reports that South Korea may deploy forces to the Strait of Hormuz and that Israel has stated regime change in Tehran is a primary objective, while noting that Ukrainian media reports of an impending northern Russian offensive lack independent verification.

Location: Tehran
strikeUnverifiedUSIsraelIranRussiaUkraine
1 source

The White House is now apparently using Russian tactics to convince the American public that the war in Iran is not, in fact, a war. When asked by reporters at the White House on Thursday whether the most intense sustained air campaign by American forces since the invasion of Iraq would be over by the midterms, Vice President JD Vance replied: “I wouldn’t call it a war.

” Vladimir Putin said much the same thing when he invaded Ukraine. Russia was not fighting a war either, the Kremlin insisted; it was merely conducting a “special military operation.” If that comparison strikes you as shocking, consider the contours of the two conflicts.

A vastly more powerful military launched a punishing offensive against a smaller, less well-equipped adversary, inflicted enormous damage without achieving a decisive resolution, and then found itself drawn into a longer, grinding conflict with no clear way out.

The motivations behind the wars may be different, and they’re playing out in different theaters, but the pattern is eerily similar. Now, so too is the attempt by those in power to control how the public understands, and even what it is allowed to call, the obvious war unfolding in front of them.

If This Isn’t a War, What Is? Let us take a moment to assess what exactly has happened since February 28, when the U.S. launched Operation Epic Fury. The opening U.S.-Israeli attack killed Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, along with the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, the defense minister and various other senior officials.

According to the U.S. military’s own accounting, the first 38 days of major combat operations involved more than 10,200 sorties and 13,500 strikes. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) says those attacks damaged or destroyed more than 85 percent of Iran’s ballistic missile, drone and naval defense industrial base, while knocking out 82 percent of its air-defense missile systems.

The U.S. sent carrier strike groups and warships into the region, later imposing a military blockade on Iranian ports. Meanwhile, American and allied air defenses intercepted more than 6,000 Iranian attack drones and 1,500 ballistic missiles fired at U.

S. forces, Israel and American partners across the Middle East. More than 50,000 U.S. service members remain deployed across the region. The fighting has killed 18 U.S. service members and at least 8,000 people across Iran, Lebanon, Israel and the Gulf states.

More than 750 U.S. service members have been wounded. Last month, during a lull in the fighting, the U.S. Treasury unveiled a sanctions package likened to an “economic D-day” that is designed to make Iran an “economic outcast” and cut the adversary off from all available forms of economic support.

In the announcement, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent openly declared that Iran had been “at war against America” for 47 years. This week, the shooting resumed; the U.S. hit targets in and around the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran blasted missiles at targets in Kuwait, Bahrain, Jordan and Iraq.

All this from an administration that almost exactly a year ago launched a rapid rebrand of the Defense Department into the “Department of War”. No boots on the ground, though, so it’s not a war, right? Tell It Kind of Like It Is Even the very best snake-oil salesman would have a hard time convincing people that the war in Iran isn’t a war.

So why is JD Vance even trying? Well, if there’s one thing politicians understand better than anyone, it’s the importance of language and rhetoric. Words have immense power; a well-written speech can unite millions of people, and a catchy slogan like Make America Great Again can come to represent an entire political philosophy.

But war is a pesky word. For one, it implies there will eventually be a winner and a loser. It also brings with it certain expectations—and some very difficult questions. What is the objective? How many people will die? When will it end? And, perhaps most dangerously of all: was it worth it?

Those are not questions the White House wants Americans to be asking. Trump built a substantial part of his political identity around ending, rather than beginning, America’s “endless wars.” When Washington and Tehran signed a memorandum of understanding in June, the White House presented it as proof that Trump’s America First approach could deliver peace without another prolonged Middle Eastern conflict.

Then the hostilities started again. Earlier this week, Trump shared a Truth Social graphic declaring that “Hormuz Oil Volumes are BACK!”, saying 18 million barrels a day were once again leaving the Strait, compared with 20 million before the war. No independent commodity tracking company or energy analyst appeared to verify Trump’s claims.

But most Americans won’t be checking tanker-tracking dashboards. What they’ll care about is the cold, hard fact that diesel hit a new record price this morning, soaring to an average of $5.85 a gallon for the first time ever. Gasoline is $4.15 a gallon on average, compared with $3.

20 at this time last year, according to AAA. The numbers on the sign at the gas station and the price on the grocery receipt aren’t affected by Trump’s tall tales, but they’ll surely affect how Americans vote at the midterms. When viewed in this light, Vance’s attempt to discourage reporters from “call[ing] it a war” begins to make sense.

A war is something that we want to end. It tends to result in a winner and a loser. And its worth is up for debate at all times. A different kind of engagement that doesn’t quite meet the threshold of war—say, a special military operation—is not exposed to the same kind of scrutiny.

Vance effectively made that case himself. “When you ask, ‘When will this end?’ You’re asking me a question like, ‘When will the Iranians stop shooting at ships?’” he said. By that logic, there is no American war—only recurring Iranian provocations that require American military responses.

That’s exactly the logic applied by Putin to Ukraine and supposed expansion of NATO. Putting the Toothpaste Back in the Tube U.S. lawmakers have repeatedly invoked the War Powers Resolution to challenge Trump’s authority to keep fighting Iran without specific congressional authorization.

The law generally gives a president 60 days after U.S. forces enter “hostilities” to secure congressional approval or bring those hostilities to an end. That makes the pauses in fighting hugely important. When the original 60-day deadline arrived in May, Trump told Congress that the temporary ceasefire reached in April meant the hostilities that began on February 28 had ended.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth argued that the War Powers clock could “pause, or stop” when the shooting did. That position is disputed by legal experts, but its political utility is obvious. If every new outbreak of fighting can be treated as a separate skirmish, rather than part of one continuous war, the administration can argue that a fresh 60-day clock starts each time.

Vance’s insistence that there is no continuing “war” fits neatly for an administration that has already tried to divide six months of conflict into separate periods of hostilities, interrupted by ceasefires and pauses. This brings us back to Moscow.

The Kremlin’s own linguistic trick was also about making one sprawling war sound smaller, more limited and more manageable than it really was. From the very beginning of the invasion, Putin described the war as a special military operation. Only after two years of grinding warfare did Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov openly declare Russia to be in a “state of war”—and even then, he said the transformation had occurred because the “collective West” had joined the fight against Russia.

Vance is playing a similar game, but in reverse. Only now—with soaring fuel prices, mounting casualties, concerns over the military’s munitions stockpiles, and midterm elections on the horizon—is the conflict no longer a war. You can’t put the genie back in the bottle, though, and the American people aren’t stupid.

Vance and the White House may discover in November that voters are perfectly capable of recognizing a war, even when the vice president doesn’t want to call it one.

Location: Iran