ConflictClarifier

ردیاب بحران ایران-خلیج فارس ۲۰۲۶
CC
Events Archive
strikeMar 14, 2026

Formula 1 Grands Prix in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia canceled amid Iran War

Summary

Formula One Group announced the cancellation of grands prix in both Bahrain and Saudi Arabia amid Middle East turmoil stemming from the Iran War. "The Bahrain and Saudi Arabian Grands Prix will not take place in April," the company announced on X. "Due to the ongoing situation in the Middle East the Grands Prix, alongside F2, F3, and F1 Academy rounds, will not take place as scheduled. While alternatives were considered, no substitutions will be made in April." Why It Matters The U.S. State Department has recently issued travel advisories to American citizens for much of the Middle East, including Bahrain and Saudi Arabia. It warned that in Bahrain, "terrorists may attack with little or no warning. Targets may include tourist sites, transportation hubs, markets, shopping malls, and religious sites as well as government and military facilities." In Saudi Arabia, the State Department warned of missile and drone attacks tied to the Iran conflict, noting that armed groups in Yemen have also targeted border regions. A U.S. bombing of Iran's Kharg Island — critical to oil exports — on Friday added even more uncertainty to the situation. President Donald Trump said the strikes targeted only military assets on the island but warned oil infrastructure could be next unless Iran stopped interfering with the ship traffic in the Strait of Hormuz. Iran responded with a threat of its own. What To Know The escalating Iran war had already injected significant uncertainty into Formula One’s Middle East calendar, with the two races scheduled for mid-April in countries that have been directly targeted or threatened by Iranian missile and drone attacks and that host U.S. military assets. Two other races in the region, the Qatar and Abu Dhabi Grands Prix, are scheduled for later this year. In a statement posted on the official F1 website, the racing organization said that it made its decision in "full consultation with the FIA and respective promoters." Calling off the Bahrain and Saudi Arabian races means there will be a five-week gap from the Japanese Grand Prix on March 29 and the next race, the Miami Grand Prix on May 3. Without any rescheduling, the 22-race schedule would be the shortest since 2023. Iran has made Bahrain one of its most heavily targeted Gulf states, launching repeated missile and drone attacks beginning on February 28, shortly after U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran. The island kingdom’s strategic role as host to the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet has placed it directly in Tehran’s line of fire. Iranian strikes have hit or threatened military installations, energy facilities and civilian areas in and around the capital, Manama. Authorities say air defenses have intercepted the majority of incoming weapons, but several attacks have caused fires, structural damage and civilian casualties. Iran has also targeted Saudi Arabia with missile and drone attacks, framing the strikes as retaliation for U.S. and Israeli military action and for the kingdom’s ties to Washington. Saudi officials say most incoming weapons have been intercepted by air defenses, but several attacks have caused damage to energy facilities and civilian areas. “In the event of an attack on the oil, economic and energy infrastructure of the Islamic Republic of Iran … all oil, economic and energy infrastructure belonging to oil companies throughout the region that own American stocks or cooperate with the United States will be immediately destroyed,” a spokesperson for Iran's Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters said, according to a report by Iran's Fars news agency. “They will be destroyed and turned into a pile of ashes.” What People Are Saying Stefano Domenicali, President and CEO of Formula 1, in a statement posted on the official F1 website: “While this was a difficult decision to take, it is unfortunately the right one at this stage considering the current situation in the Middle East." "I want to take this opportunity to thank the FIA as well as our incredible promoters for their support and total understanding as they were looking forward to hosting us with their usual energy and passion," Domenicali added. "We cannot wait to be back with them as soon as the circumstances allow us to do so.” Mohammed Ben Sulayem, FIA President, in a statement posted on the official F1 website: “The FIA will always place the safety and wellbeing of our community and colleagues first. After careful consideration, we have taken this decision with that responsibility firmly in mind. We continue to hope for calm, safety and a swift return to stability in the region, and my thoughts remain with all those affected by these recent events." “Bahrain and Saudi Arabia are incredibly important to the ecosystem of our racing season, and I look forward to returning to both as soon as circumstances allow," Ben Sulayem added. "My sincere thanks to the promoters, our partners, and our colleagues across the championship for the collaborative and constructive approach that has led to this decision.” Sheikh Salman bin Isa Al Khalifa, Chief Executive of the Bahrain International Circuit: “We fully support the decision by Formula 1, and we are grateful to them and to the FIA for their support and enduring partnership. We look forward to welcoming fans from all around the world back to Bahrain when F1 returns. On behalf of all of us at BIC, I take this opportunity to offer our sincere thanks to all those in the F1 community who have taken the time to send us messages of support.” HRH Prince Khalid bin Sultan Al-Abdullah Al-Faisal, Chairman of the Saudi Automobile and Motorcycle Federation: “The Saudi Automobile and Motorcycle Federation respect the decision taken by Formula 1 regarding the 2026 race calendar. Fans across the Kingdom were once again looking forward to the Formula 1 STC Saudi Arabian Grand Prix in Jeddah this April, but we understand the considerations behind this decision and remain in close partnership with Formula 1." This article includes reporting by the Associated Press. Update 3/14/26, 7:33 p.m. ET: This article has been updated with additional information. In a polarized era, the center is dismissed as bland. At Newsweek, ours is different: The Courageous Center—it's not "both sides," it's sharp, challenging and alive with ideas. We follow facts, not factions. If that sounds like the kind of journalism you want to see thrive, we need you. When you become a Newsweek Member, you support a mission to keep the center strong and vibrant. Members enjoy: Ad-free browsing, exclusive content and editor conversations. Help keep the center courageous. Join today.

Actors involved

USIranIsrael

Sources

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