Israel

WASHINGTON — The United States plunged further into conflict with Iran on Tuesday as a new round of strikes heightened fears of an expanding war in the Middle East, sending markets reeling and oil prices soaring and drawing urgent calls from European leaders for a plan forward.

President Trump acknowledged during an Oval Office appearance that the public would feel some economic pain as fighting continues to threaten areas that are critical to the world’s oil and natural gas production.

“As soon as this ends, those prices are going to drop, I believe lower than ever before,” Trump said, though he did not provide a clear time frame for when the conflict might end.

As the war stretched into its fourth day on Tuesday, Israel struck Iranian missile launch facilities and weapon factories and Iran retaliated across the Persian Gulf region, including attacks on U.S. diplomatic sites in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Dubai.

The conflict simultaneously set off alarms in the global markets, prompting stocks in Europe and Asia to plunge and the S&P 500 to drop nearly 1% after falling as much as 2.5% in early trading.

European governments were also forced to contend with the fallout, with some countries increasing their military presence in the region as their actions are closely monitored by Trump, who publicly singled out countries that he thought had been helpful in his war efforts so far.

“Spain has been terrible,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office while threatening to “cut off all trade with Spain” after he said the country had denied American forces access to its military bases.

Trump said he was “not happy with the U.K. either” and complained about not being allowed to use a military base on Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands. Without access to that military base, Trump said American planes were forced to fly “many extra hours.”

“We were very surprised. This is not Winston Churchill that we’re dealing with,” Trump said. Churchill served as Britain’s prime minister during World War II.

As Trump threatened European allies, he sat next to German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, underscoring the fraught landscape that world leaders are navigating as American and Israeli forces work to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and nuclear program and eye a potential change in government.

During their meeting, Trump said Germany has allowed the United States to use its air bases. Beyond that help, Trump said, “we’re not asking them to put boots on the ground or anything.”

When asked by reporters how Germany intended to help in the conflict, Merz said he wanted to focus on talking to Trump about what comes “the day after” the war ends.

“We are on the same page in terms of getting this terrible regime in Iran away and we will talk about the day after, what will happen then, if they are out,” Merz said.

Trump talks about regime change options

Trump did not have much to say yet on what will come next and was unclear on who will lead the Iranian government, saying that U.S. and Israeli military operations had killed the people who he thought could have filled the leadership vacuum.

“Most of the people we had in mind are dead,” Trump said. “Now, we have another group, but they may be dead also based on reports so I guess you have a third wave coming in and pretty soon we’re not going to know anybody.”

His remarks were a startling acknowledgment in part because minutes earlier he said the worst-case scenario in his mind was that the military operation would take place and “then somebody takes over who is as bad as the previous person.”

“That could happen,” Trump said.

Asked if Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, son of the former shah, is someone he would like to run the country, Trump said he is a “very nice person,” but did not say for sure whether he is his choice.

The president and his top aides have offered varying explanations when asked about regime change, drawing criticism from Democrats and some conservatives who are demanding to know why Americans are being dragged into a war with no clear end in sight.

On Saturday, when U.S. and Israeli forces first struck Iran, Trump said overthrowing Iran’s theocratic regime was part of his rationale. But on Monday, he emphasized that Iran’s missiles posed a threat to the United States, and therefore theattack was carried out to eradicate its missile capability and nuclear program.

After briefing lawmakers Monday afternoon, Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters that the United States launched a “preemptive” attack on Iran because officials knew Israel was going to strike the country — a move that he said would have put U.S. forces at risk and led to even more U.S. casualties. As of Tuesday, six American troops have been killed in combat.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), after being briefed by Trump administration officials on Monday afternoon, said, “Israel was determined to act in their own defense, with or without American support.”

“If Israel fired upon Iran, and took action against Iran to take out the missiles, then they would have immediately retaliated against U.S. personnel and assets,” Johnson told reporters.

Trump disputed the suggestion that Israel’s plans to attack Iran prompted him to launch the strikes, saying it was the other way around.

“If anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand,” Trump said Tuesday. “But Israel was ready, and we were ready, and we’ve had a very, very powerful impact because virtually everything they have has been knocked out.”

But it was unclear how far along the U.S. military is in accomplishing its mission.

In a letter Monday, Trump told Congress that while the “United States desires a quick and enduring peace, it is not possible at this time to know the full scope and duration of military operations that may be necessary.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-New York) warned in a speech on the Senate floor that the administration’s murky strategy is not good for the country.

“History teaches us a simple lesson: Wars without a clear objective do not stay small. They get bigger, they get bloodier, they get longer, they get more expensive,” Schumer said. “This is not a defensive war. This is not a necessary war. This is a war of choice.”

The latest attacks on the region

Tuesday saw yet another expansion of the war when Israeli troops blitzed into Lebanon in a bid to dislodge the Iran-backed Shiite militant group Hezbollah.

The ground invasion comes one day after Hezbollah lobbed rockets and drones at an Israeli military position across the border; an attack, the group said, that was vengeance for the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and a response to Israel’s near-daily violations of a ceasefire brokered by the U.S. in November 2024.

The attack sparked a massive Israeli assault on dozens of villages and towns in southern Lebanon, as well as on the southern suburbs of the Lebanese capital, Beirut. The strikes killed 40 people, wounded 246 others and saw tens of thousands forced to leave their homes and scramble for shelter in Beirut and elsewhere, according to Lebanese authorities.

The Lebanese army said Tuesday that it was withdrawing from positions in southern Lebanon ahead of a ground incursion by Israeli troops. The Israeli military’s Arabic-language spokesman then issued a warning to residents of some 80 towns and villages in that region to “immediately evacuate your homes” and move northward.

Hezbollah, meanwhile, maintained a defiant stance and continued rocket and drone launches into Israel.

“The era of patience has ended, and we have no option but to return to resistance,” said Mahmoud Qatari, who chairs Hezbollah’s Political Council. “If Israel wants an open war, so be it.”

The invasion comes more than a year after Israel occupied parts of southern Lebanon in 2024. After the ceasefire came into effect, Israel withdrew from most parts of the country save for five positions near the border. Yet in the 15 months since the ceasefire was signed, it has proved to be more notional for Lebanon, with Israeli warplanes and troops conducting well over 10,000 truce violations, according to the U.N.

Israel says its actions are to stop Hezbollah from reconstituting itself near the border, but the result has meant residents of border towns and villages in southern Lebanon have been unable to return home.

Israel’s military spokesman, Brigadier Gen. Effie Defrin, said in a statement that troops were “creating a buffer” inside Lebanon between residents in northern Israel “and any threat.”

As the conflict has escalated, some 1,600 Americans stranded across the region have requested assistance and the Trump administration is trying to help evacuate them, Rubio said. But the effort has faced challenges because Iranian missiles have struck many Mideast airports.

“We know we are going to be able to help them,” Rubio said. “It is going to take a little time because we do not control the airspace closures.”

Ceballos reported from Washington, Bulos from Khartoum, Sudan.

French President Emmanuel Macron has warned Israel against invading Lebanon, after the Israeli military said its troops had begun operating in the south of the country following Hezbollah attacks.

NEW YORK — U.S. and Israeli officials are privately casting doubt on projections from the Trump administration that the war with Iran could end within a matter of weeks — instead warning that a months-long campaign may be required to destroy the country’s ballistic missile capabilities and install a pliant government, multiple sources told The Times.

The prospect of extended combat creates new political risks and uncertainties for President Trump, whose penchant for dramatic, short-term military operations has suddenly given way to a full-scale assault on the Islamic Republic, shocking a MAGA base that for years supported his calls to end forever wars in the Middle East.

One Israeli official told The Times — despite internal guidance among Israeli officials to adhere to the U.S. president’s stated time frame — that the war “definitely could be longer” than the four-week window that Trump repeatedly offered to reporters.

A U.S. official said that in private conversations, top administration officials presume the campaign will require a longer runway now that remnants of Iran’s government have chosen to resist rather than acquiesce to Washington.

Protracted war was always a possibility. Trump was presented with U.S. intelligence assessments gaming out the potential conflict that emphasized how highly unpredictable the results of an attack would be — an analysis the intelligence community believes has borne out on the ground in the chaotic early days of the conflict.

A longer conflict could create diplomatic space between Trump and Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who has advocated for the overthrow of the Islamic Republic for over 30 years.

The Israeli leader has succeeded in convincing Trump to take military actions in Iran that American presidents have rejected for decades, from bombing its nuclear facilities to assassinating its leadership, including Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed in an opening strike over the weekend.

Goal of regime change fades

Yet, mere days into the war, White House officials have all but ceased references to a democratic spring that could sweep Iran’s government aside.

A set of four U.S. goals for the mission no longer calls for changing the regime itself. Still, Netanyahu’s government remains keen on replacing the government, and the nation’s longest-serving premier sees the current war as his best opportunity to do so, one official said.

Speaking with reporters Tuesday, Trump rejected reports that the Israelis had convinced him to launch the attack.

“No, I might have forced their hand,” Trump said. “Based on the way the negotiations were going, I think they were going to attack first, and I didn’t want that to happen. So if anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand, but Israel was ready, and we were ready, and we’ve had a very, very powerful impact because virtually everything they have had been knocked out.”

In a series of interviews this week, Trump said he had been given projections of a four- or five-week war, while noting he is prepared to go longer if necessary.

Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official who is Iran expert at the American Enterprise Institute, said that projecting a deadline to the conflict at its start would be a strategic mistake for the Trump administration, as it would in effect give Iran’s remaining leadership an end date to wait out the fighting.

“Successive presidents have shown that America has strategic attention deficit disorder,” Rubin said. “If that was the case in Iraq and Afghanistan, it’s especially true under Trump. He imposed a ceasefire on Gaza that let Hamas survive to fight another day; they still haven’t disarmed.”

The duration of the war will depend, in part, on Iran’s ability to resist and defend its remaining capabilities — but also on the president’s willingness to accept an outcome that leaves the Islamic Republic in place.

That decision has not yet been made by Trump, who has vacillated between calls for a democratic uprising across Iran — and U.S. military options to support resistance groups inside the country — as opposed to a shorter campaign that cripples Iran’s political leadership and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

“I can go long and take over the whole thing, or end it in two or three days and tell the Iranians, ‘See you again in a few years if you start rebuilding,” Trump told Axios.

One of Israel’s primary goals is to effectively eliminate the country’s ballistic missile program, and progress on that score is ahead of schedule, another source familiar with the operation said. “Things are going very well at the moment,” the source added. “Great pace.”

An Israeli military source noted to The Times that the stated goal of the mission is to significantly degrade, but not necessarily destroy, Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities, a goal the source said could be accomplished within Trump’s preferred time frame.

“Israel was quite unhappy Trump ordered the [June 2025] 12-day war ended when it did,” said Patrick Clawson, director of the Iran program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. He said he expected the current war would “take time” to comprehensively set back Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities, after a series of Israeli missions in 2024 against the missile program failed to set them back by more than a matter of months.

“Some Israelis think before the recent strikes, Iranian production was fully restored,” Clawson said. “So a really comprehensive attack on Iranian missiles is an important Israeli objective.”

The Maduro model

But no one inside the Islamic Republic system has emerged so far to serve in a supplicant role to Trump in the way that Delcy Rodríguez has stepped in as acting president of Venezuela, after U.S. forces captured that country’s strongman president, Nicolás Maduro, in an audacious overnight raid in January.

Since then, the Stars and Stripes have flown alongside the Venezuelan tricolor at government buildings in Caracas, where senior Trump administration officials have been welcomed to discuss lucrative opportunities in Venezuela’s oil industry.

Trump is now looking for an Iranian counterpart to Rodríguez, he said Tuesday, suggesting he is willing to keep the Islamic Republic in place despite encouraging its citizens to rise up against their government.

“Most of the people we had in mind are dead,” Trump said in the Oval Office. “We had some in mind from that group that is dead. And now we have another group. They may be dead also. Pretty soon we’re not gonna know anybody.”

“I mean, Venezuela was so incredible because we did the attack and we kept the government totally intact,” he added.

Dennis Ross, a veteran diplomat on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict who served in the George H.W. Bush, Clinton and Obama administrations, expressed doubt that Trump would be willing to proceed with a months-long campaign, regardless of Israel’s aspirational objectives.

“I believe President Trump doesn’t define clear objectives so he can decide to end the war at a time of his choosing, and declare the objective at that point, announcing we have achieved what we sought to do,” said Ross, noting that finding a figurehead in Iran as he did in Venezuela was always “a long shot.”

“Unilaterally, he could declare we made the regime pay a price for killing its citizens, and we have weakened Iran to the point that it is not any longer a threat to its neighbors,” Ross added. “He could then say, if Iran continues the war, we will hit them even harder.”

US officials confirmed the US didn’t attack Iran because of an ‘imminent threat’ but because Israel was planning to strike anyway. Al Jazeera’s Nada Qaddourah breaks down the Trump administration’s justifications for starting the war and examines whether they hold up.

Oman had been mediating talks between Iran and the US before Washington attacked Tehran.

Omani Minister of Foreign Affairs Badr al-Busaidi, who mediated the US-Iran talks before the war, has said that diplomatic options are still “available” to de-escalate the situation in the Middle East.

“Oman reaffirms its call for an immediate ceasefire and a return to responsible regional diplomacy. There are off ramps available. Let’s use them,” he said on X on Tuesday.

Al-Busaidi did not provide details on what the options to end the ongoing conflict between Iran and joint Israeli and US forces could be.

Oman had been mediating talks between Iran and the US and said that peace was “within reach” hours before the US-Israeli air strikes began on Saturday, plunging the region into a crisis.

On Tuesday, US President Donald Trump told journalists in Washington, DC, that the US had attacked Iran because “he had a feeling” that Iran would strike first, as negotiations over its nuclear programme stalled.

However, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had said on Monday that the US attacked Iran because it knew Israel was about to bomb the country, and because the Trump administration believed that Tehran would then strike US facilities in the region.

But Oman’s foreign minister pushed back on the Trump administration’s characterisation that Iran was an “imminent threat” to the US. He maintained that “significant progress” had been made in the nuclear talks before the US and Israel launched attacks on Iran.

In its retaliatory strikes, Iran has attacked Israel and US forces across the Gulf region. While Oman does not host any US forces, it has also been struck and dragged into the conflict.

The Oman News Agency reported on Sunday that the Duqm commercial port, located in Al Wusta Governorate in central Oman, was struck by two drones. It said that an expatriate worker was injured in the attack.

A fuel tank at Duqm Port was also hit in a drone attack on Tuesday, but there were no casualties.

Majed al-Ansari, a spokesperson for Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said the strike on Oman was “an attack on the very principle of mediation”.

Trump expressed solidarity with Gulf countries on Tuesday, saying, “Iran is hitting countries that had nothing to do with what is going on.”

Less than a month ago, Destiny Littleton posted on Instagram about a whimsical visit to a McDonald’s in Jerusalem, where the former USC shooting guard is playing professional basketball.

Her posts the last four days have been decidedly different. Sirens blare in the background as she anxiously tries to locate a bomb shelter. Then bombs can be heard, although Littleton can’t bring herself to say the word, instead spelling it out: “I definitely hear three or four B-O-M-B noises,” she says in video. “You didn’t hear that?”

Littleton is one of many United States citizens attempting to leave the Middle East per guidance from the U.S. State Department. The department posted on social media site X, instructing U.S. citizens to leave more than a dozen countries because of safety risks and to shelter in place until they are able to do so.

The war that began when U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Saturday, killing its Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has grown into a regional conflict. Iran and its allies have retaliated against Israel and neighboring Gulf states.

Littleton played at USC in 2022-2023 as a graduate student, transferring after winning a national championship at South Carolina a year earlier. As a San Diego Bishop high school senior in 2016-2017, she led the nation in scoring and became the first high school player in state history to score more than 4,000 points in a career.

Littleton moved to Israel in November to play for Hapoel Jerusalem, one of the top pro teams in the country. Like anyone in Israel, her life has been upended the last several days.

She has chronicled the ordeal with a handful of Instagram posts. In one, she filmed bright flashes in the sky while saying, “There’s no siren going on right now and yet there are these things in the sky blowing up. Pretty sure they’re either missiles or drones.”

On Monday she relocated to the home of a teammate because she said the bomb shelter she had been using was tiny.

“I’m going to go pack my stuff up and go to my teammate’s house until all this is over,” she said while walking hurriedly outside. “They have a shelter there. It’s way more comfortable than that B-O-M-B shelter I was just in. It could fit five people and that was it. I was, ‘no, no, no, I don’t want to be in here.’”

Bombs could still be heard in the distance on her videos Monday and Tuesday. Littleton, like many foreigners, is trying to leave Israel as soon as possible.

“To those asking why haven’t I left, the air space is closed so nobody can go in or out,” she said. “Until that gets lifted, I will be here and remain safe with my teammates.”

South Carolina coach Dawn Staley wrote on X that three of her former players — Littleton, Mikiah Herbert-Harrigan and Tiffany Mitchell — are “in a war zone” in Israel but she said Sunday that “there’s nothing you can do” because of the canceled flights.

Littleton thanked her followers in one of her latest dispatches:

“It is 11:47 p.m. on night three and I first just want to say thank you to all the strangers, all of my friends and my family who have sent countless prayers and love my way,” she said. “I’m so grateful and thankful. It means the world to me and it has got me through these three days….

“Back to the update. We have had a really quiet day today…. For a moment it felt like we are not in a war. I’ve just got to thank God and give prayers for the peace we’ve had today. My mind is at ease, just a little bit. I’m thankful for the small wins and pray as we look for a way out, try to get to a safe space, back home to America is the goal.

“I know that with everyone helping and everyone by my side, I will get there, we will get there, my teammates and everyone in the league will get there. Again, thank you. I love you guys.”

Beirut, Lebanon – Hezbollah raised the stakes for the Lebanese government on Tuesday, when it launched an attack on Israel’s Ramat Airbase and a barrage of rockets another military facility in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights, a day after Prime Minister Nawaf Salam’s cabinet announced a ban on Hezbollah’s military and security activities.

Analysts said that the Lebanese government’s decision, while difficult to implement, might have a decisive impact on the future of Lebanon. Some say it was a necessary step to bring decisions related to security and defence under the central government’s control, while others argue it raises the spectre of internal strife.

Imad Salamey, a political scientist at the Lebanese American University, said that implementation of the government’s decision to disarm Hezbollah was “more plausible today than in previous years because the decision reflects unusually broad national backing, including from within the Shia political sphere”.

“Amal’s vote in favour signals that support for consolidating arms under state authority is no longer framed purely as a sectarian or anti-resistance demand, but increasingly as a state-stabilisation necessity – especially amid economic collapse and regional escalation,” he said, referring to the other Lebanese Shia Muslim group headed by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri.

But Michael Young, a Lebanon expert at the Carnegie Middle East Center, said the decision was easier said than done.

“Implementation is going to he much more complicated. The army is not enthusiastic to enter into a fight with Hezbollah,” Young told Al Jazeera.

“It’s good that the state has taken this decision, but it is not good that the army seems very reluctant to implement this decision,” he added.

The Iran-backed Hezbollah effectively joined the war that the United States and Israel started against Iran on Saturday when it launched a barrage of rockets and drones towards northern Israel on Monday, saying it was acting to avenge the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran and Israel’s near-daily attacks on Lebanon.

Israel responded by hitting Beirut’s southern suburbs with loud attacks that woke many of the city’s residents up, and issued evacuation warnings for more than 50 towns, displacing tens of thousands of people from their homes.

Hezbollah’s military actions banned

As this unfolded, Salam’s cabinet met and debated the events before the prime minister called an emergency news conference.

“We announce a ban on Hezbollah’s military activities and restrict its role to the political sphere,” Salam said in a news conference on Monday after the meeting.

“We declare our rejection of any military or security operations launched from Lebanese territory outside the framework of legitimate institutions.”

He added that all of Hezbollah’s military or security activities are “illegal” and said security forces would “prevent any attacks originating from Lebanese territory” against Israel or other states.

“We declare our commitment to the cessation of hostilities and the resumption of negotiations,” he said.

The statement was the strongest stance against Hezbollah to date and even gained the support of Parliament Speaker, and longtime staunch Hezbollah ally, Nabih Berri, who leads the Amal Movement.

Justice Minister Adel Nassar, meanwhile, ordered the arrest of the people who ordered the attack.

A ‘landmark’ decision

Hezbollah has been Lebanon’s strongest political and military force for decades. But the 2023-2024 war with Israel devastated the group. Hezbollah lost the majority of its military leadership, including longtime Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah.

Since the end of that war, a debate over Hezbollah’s weapons and role has ensued. Salam’s government has promised to disarm Hezbollah, while the group itself only accepted giving up its arms south of the Litani River that cuts across southern Lebanon.

Despite a November 2024 ceasefire agreement, Israel continued to attack south and east Lebanon almost daily. But since Hezbollah’s retaliation, Israel has started bombing Beirut’s suburbs again. On Monday alone, Israel killed more than 52 people, wounded more than 150 others, struck targets all over Lebanon, and gave evacuation orders for more than 50 Lebanese towns.

While Hezbollah’s first attack on Israel in over a year took many by surprise, Israel’s violent response did not.

Critics of Hezbollah pointed out that the group had acted recklessly and gave Israel an excuse to unleash its fury on Lebanon. Israel has also spoken about a potential ground invasion.

For analysts, the Lebanese government’s decision was a clear indication of how far the group has fallen since 2024.

“The government’s decision to officially ban all Hezbollah activities represents a landmark shift in the position of the government toward disarming Hezbollah,” Dania Arayssi, a senior analyst at New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy, told Al Jazeera. “This is a further reaffirmation that Hezbollah has lost a lot, if not all, its political power and influence in the Lebanese government.”

Arayssi said Hezbollah’s diminished status since 2024 also meant that the likelihood of a clash between the group and the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) was minimal.

“I don’t think there is a possibility of this leading to internal strife,” she said.

Hezbollah challenges Salam’s government

Hezbollah did not welcome the announcement.

The head of Hezbollah’s Parliamentary Bloc, Mohammad Raad, dispelled rumours of his assassination on Monday evening when he released a statement dismissing the government’s decision.

“We see no justification for Prime Minister Salam and his government to take bombastic decisions against Lebanese citizens who reject the occupation and accuse them of violating the peace that the enemy itself has denied and refused to uphold for a year and four months,” Raad said in a statement. “[Israel] has imposed a state of daily war on the Lebanese people.”

“The Lebanese were expecting a decision to ban aggression, but instead they are faced with a decision to ban the rejection of aggression,” Raad added.

Jawad Salhab, a political researcher and analyst, called the government’s move “a grave betrayal of the Lebanese people and a grave betrayal of the Lebanese state, whose sovereignty has been violated for 15 months.”

“Fifteen months of strategic patience have cost us more than 500 martyrs, while this Zionist enemy has persisted in its aggression against Lebanon and its sovereignty by air, land, and sea,” he said.

Overnight on Monday, leading into Tuesday, Israel struck targets around Lebanon, including the southern suburbs of the capital Beirut. In one strike, Israel targeted al-Manar, Hezbollah’s television station.

Then, on Tuesday morning, Hezbollah attacked Israel again, in what will be interpreted as a clear challenge to Salam’s announcement.

The Lebanese army had been tasked with an earlier government decision to disarm Hezbollah and said in January that it completed the first phase south of the Litani River. But Hezbollah has refused to move along with phase two, set to take place between the Litani and the Awali River, which is near the city of Sidon.

Nicholas Blanford, a nonresident senior fellow with the US-based Atlantic Council, told Al Jazeera that the government’s move was a “bold step” but one that might be difficult to enforce.

“How can they implement the decision?” Blanford asked, adding that it increased the potential for internal conflict.

A shock-and-awe campaign laying down a tsunami of bombs. An enemy succumbing rapidly under overwhelming firepower. And a triumphant U.S. president trumpeting a quick and easy campaign.

In 2003, President George W. Bush strode confidently on the deck of an aircraft carrier less than five weeks after he ordered the invasion of Iraq and declared the “end of major combat operations” under a banner proclaiming “Mission Accomplished.”

It proved anything but.

The invasion became a meat grinder, leaving thousands of Americans and possibly more than a million Iraqis dead. It unleashed forces whose effects are felt in the region and beyond to this day.

More than two decades later, another U.S. president attacked another Persian Gulf nation, promising rapid success in yet another Middle East adventure that he says will remake the region.

President Trump and his staff have vehemently rejected any comparison between “Operation Epic Fury,” launched Saturday, and “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” On Monday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gave a pugnacious news conference, insisting, “This is not Iraq. This is not endless.”

Yet the assault on Iran — almost four times larger than Iraq with more than double its population — presents no lack of challenges, ones that could spread chaos far beyond Iran’s borders and become a defining feature of Trump’s presidency.

In many ways, analysts say, toppling Iran’s leadership represents a much more complex task than Iraq ever did. Iraq was a state with deep sectarian divisions that was largely dominated by a single dictator: Saddam Hussein.

The Iran that emerged after the 1978-79 Islamic Revolution had a supreme leader, but Iran also developed an elaborate system of governance. That includes a president, a parliament and varying governmental, military and religious hierarchies, noted Paul Salem, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute.

“Unlike Saddam’s Iraq, the Iranian state is multi-institutional and hence much more resilient — and, yes, not as vulnerable,” Salem said. “And hostility to the United States and Israel is at the heart of the Islamic Revolution — baked into the state.”

Here are some of the ways the Iran attacks could develop into the very scenarios Trump once derided in his days as the antiwar candidate:

Boots on the ground

For now, the U.S. and Israel have wielded air power to pound Tehran into submission. In the first minutes of the joint operation, a 200-plane fleet — Israel’s largest — struck more than 500 targets in Iran, according to the Israeli military. One such strike killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Iran is still fighting back, lobbing missiles at Israel, Persian Gulf nations, Jordan and other areas with U.S. bases in the region. The U.S. has the qualitative and quantitative edge of materiel to eventually prevail, but Iran’s capabilities will not make it easy, as the losses in service members and planes have demonstrated in the last two days.

And wars have never been won with air power alone. Rather than relying on boots on the ground, Trump expects ordinary Iranians to finish the job for him.

“When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take,” he said in a video address on the first day of the campaign.

During the Arab Spring of 2011, protesters throughout the Middle East took to the streets to demand change. But those efforts mostly did not lead to significant reforms and, in some countries, prompted further repression.

In Iran, it’s true many people would welcome the Islamic Republic’s demise — as many Iraqis rejoiced at Hussein’s fall. But it’s unlikely that mostly unarmed protesters will triumph in a confrontation against enforcers from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or its volunteer wing, the Basij.

It’s also difficult to gauge how many of Iran’s 93 million people despise the government enough to rise up against it.

Meanwhile, Trump has left the door open for dispatching U.S. troops, but the math of such a deployment raises doubts.

According to the U.S. Army, counterinsurgency doctrine dictates 20 to 25 troops for every 1,000 inhabitants to achieve stability. In the case of Iran that would entail deploying 1.9 million people — almost all the U.S. military’s active duty, reserve and National Guard personnel.

New leadership unclear

At this point, it’s not clear that decapitation of much of Iran’s leadership class will produce any real change in government, much less a successor inclined to bend to U.S. wishes. The top echelons of the Islamic Republic boast a deep bench of mostly hard-liners — not surprising, perhaps, for a nation that has braced for attack for years, if not decades.

Whatever new leadership that does emerge could rally around the “martyrdom” of Khamenei. Not especially popular in life, he appears to have become, in death, a rallying cry for defiance. And martyrs are exalted in Shiite Islam, Iran’s prevalent faith.

“He was the religious leader of the Shiites, so it’s sort of like killing the pope,” Salem said. “And he’s more popular dying as a martyr, than, say, of a heart attack. … He went out in style, no doubt about it.”

When the U.S. occupied Iraq, the expectation was that whatever came next would be a fervent U.S. ally, an idea perhaps best captured in the notion in Washington that a grateful Iraqi populace would shower U.S. troops with flowers. That didn’t happen. And in the Darwin-esque culling of leaders that followed, the ones that emerged victorious had little love for the U.S.

One of them was Nouri Al-Maliki, a Shiite supremacist whose policies were blamed for fueling years of sectarian bloodletting, and whose loyalties often seemed more aligned with Tehran than Washington.

Meanwhile, Tehran, playing on its proximity and deep ties to the new Iraqi ruling class, was able to steer Iraq — a majority Shiite country — deeper into its orbit.

After the Iraqi government — with the help of a U. S.-led coalition — pushed Islamic State out of Iraq in 2017, Iran was able to embed allied militias into Iraq’s armed services. That created the paradoxical situation of Tehran-aligned fighters wielding U.S.-supplied materiel.

Iraq has yet to emerge from Iran’s shadow. After Iraq’s most recent elections, Maliki seems poised to become prime minister once more, prompting Trump to write on Truth Social, “Because of his insane policies and ideologies, if elected, the United States of America will no longer help Iraq.”

A fragmented opposition

Iran’s population is diverse; an estimated two-thirds of Iranians are Persian, while minorities include Kurds, Baloch, Arabs and Azeris.

Those minorities have long-standing grievances against the ruling majority. It’s possible that Trump’s campaign and the resulting disorder could fuel separatist tensions.

Just last month, Iranian Kurdish factions joined together in a coalition that they said would seek the overthrow of the Islamic Republic “to achieve the Kurdish people’s right to self-determination, and to establish a national and democratic entity based on the political will of the Kurdish nation in Iranian Kurdistan.”

An experienced insurgency

Over the decades, the Islamic Republic created a network that at its peak stretched from Pakistan to Lebanon.

It was a fearsome constellation of paramilitary factions and amenable governments that became known as the Axis of Resistance. It included Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Palestinian lands, Yemen’s Houthis, and militias in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan.

After Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attacks, Israel — and, eventually, the United States — launched offensive campaigns to defang the groups.

Although weakened, the factions still survive, and could form a powerful, transnational and motivated insurgency when the time comes to fight whatever emerges if the Islamic Republic falls.

Bulos reported from Khartoum, Sudan, and McDonnell from Mexico City.

Al Jazeera’s Zeina Khodr reports from the site of an Israeli attack in Beirut’s southern suburbs, which Israel says targeted a ‘Hezbollah area’. Israeli forces have taken more land inside Lebanon, expanding a de facto buffer zone that has already displaced tens of thousands of people.

Jeffrey Feltman, former US Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, questions the legal basis and endgame of the US-Israel war on Iran, saying he does not believe Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States that would justify war.

Mérida, March 2, 2026 (venezuelanalysis.com) – Venezuelan popular movements condemned the recent US and Israeli attacks against Iran and expressed support and solidarity with the West Asian nation. 

On Saturday, February 28, the International Platform for Solidarity with the Palestinian Cause and the Alexis Vive Patriotic Force were among the organizations issuing statements rejecting Washington and Tel Aviv’s military actions.

The organizations decried the bombings of Iranian territory, including against civilian targets, and described the operations as serious violations of international law. The International Platform for Solidarity with the Palestinian Cause expressed “deep outrage” over the bombing of a girls’ school in Minab that killed over 175 people.

“This infamous act will not crush the heroic resistance of the Iranian people, in their example of dignity in the face of imperialist and zionist aggression,” the platform’s communiqué read.

For its part, the Alexis Vive Patriotic Force emphasized that the latest attacks are not an isolated incident, but rather “another attempt to impose regime change and undermine Iran’s self-determination.” 

“These actions seek to reconfigure the political map of Western Asia in favor of the strategic interests of Washington and Tel Aviv,” the organization, a driving force in El Panal Commune in Caracas, added in its statement.

The Venezuelan chapter of Alba Movimientos, a continental alliance of social movements, likewise issued a statement declaring “unrestricted solidarity” with Iran and calling on multilateral organizations to deter the US and Israel’s “warmongering.”

Venezuelan grassroots organizations scheduled a rally on Tuesday in front of the Iranian embassy in Caracas to reiterate their support and condemnation of the foreign aggression against the country.

West Asia has been thrown into open conflict after the US and Israel launched operations “Epic Fury” and “Lion’s Roar,” respectively, on Saturday, with widespread bombings against Iran and targeted assassinations against the country’s leadership. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, was killed along with several relatives by an Israeli strike. 

Washington and Tel Aviv justified the systematic bombing of Tehran and other cities as a “preemptive strike,” with officials from both countries claiming without evidence that Iran was working toward nuclear weapons.

In response, Iranian forces launched defensive maneuvers and retaliatory attacks against US military assets in the region, striking bases and other targets in countries including Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Iraq, and Jordan. Iran has also launched multiple waves of missiles against Israel and vowed to implement a strategic blockade in the Strait of Hormuz.

Caracas withdraws statement, expresses solidarity with Qatar

The Venezuelan government issued a statement on Saturday expressing its “condemnation and deep regret” that the “military option was chosen” with attacks against Iran while diplomatic talks were ongoing. However, Caracas did not name the US and Israel as the perpetrators. 

The communiqué went on to condemn Iran’s retaliatory actions as “inappropriate and reprehensible military reprisals against targets in various countries in the region.” The document ended with a call for a return to negotiations between all parties.

The government’s position drew widespread criticism on social media and was removed from the Foreign Ministry’s official accounts, as well as from Foreign Minister Yván Gil’s Telegram and X platforms, on Saturday evening.

Venezuelan leaders, including Acting President Delcy Rodríguez, have offered no explanation for the statement’s publication and deletion. On Monday, Rodríguez reported a phone conversation with Qatari Emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani in which she expressed “solidarity” amidst the “violence and instability” in the region.

“I expressed my condolences and deep concern over the loss of civilian lives due to the ongoing conflict, reiterating our call to respect international law and preserve peace,” the acting president wrote.

Caracas’ latest stance contrasts with its previous fierce condemnations of US and Israeli actions in West Asia, including the genocide in Gaza, attacks against Lebanon, and the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Venezuela had likewise firmly backed Iran, one of its strongest allies in the past quarter century, against foreign attacks, including during the June 2026 war against Israel.

During Hugo Chávez’s presidency (1999-2013), Caracas and Tehran consolidated a multidimensional strategic alliance based on opposition to US expansion and a commitment to building a multipolar world. During this period, more than 270 bilateral agreements were signed in sectors such as energy, housing, agriculture, and technology.

The close ties, described by both governments as a “revolutionary brotherhood,” also provided key lifelines as both countries faced US-led economic sanctions. Venezuela benefited from Iranian technology transfers in areas such as drone manufacturing, cement, and vehicle assembly.

Iran provided key fuel shipments in 2020, defying US threats, as the Venezuelan economy reeled under US coercive measures.

Edited by Ricardo Vaz in Caracas.

Israeli attacks on Lebanon have killed more than 50 people. It says the strikes are a response to Hezbollah rockets and drones fired into Israel to protest the US-Israeli killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader.

Iran strikes energy infrastructure across the Gulf as IRGC announces closure of Strait of Hormuz.

Members of Nigeria’s Shia Muslim community are mourning Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who was killed by a US-Israeli attack in Tehran. Demonstrators carried his portrait and waved Iranian flags while they dragged American and Israeli flags along the ground.

Videos show smoke rising from a refinery operated by Saudi Aramco after a fire broke out, which Saudi officials say was caused by debris from an intercepted Iranian missile. Oil prices have surged sharply amid the disruption and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, raising fears over global supply.

The killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in a United States-Israeli air campaign has sent shockwaves through the Middle East, decapitating the leadership of the “axis of resistance” at its most critical moment.

For decades, this network of groups allied with Iran was Tehran’s forward line of defence. But today, with its commander-in-chief dead and its logistical arteries cut, the alliance looks less like a unified war machine and more like a series of isolated islands.

Hassan Ahmadian, a professor at the University of Tehran, warned that the era of strategic patience is over and the Iranian government is now prepared to “burn everything” in response to the attacks.

While Tehran promised to retaliate against the US and Israel “with a force they have never experienced before”, the reaction from its key proxies in Lebanon, Yemen and Iraq revealed a deep hesitation driven by local existential threats that may outweigh their ideological loyalty to a fallen leader.

Hezbollah: Walking between raindrops

In Beirut, the response from Hezbollah, long considered the crown jewel among Iran’s regional allies, has been cautiously calibrated.

After Sunday’s announcement of Khamenei’s death, the group issued a statement condemning the attack as the “height of criminality”. However, Al Jazeera correspondent in Beirut Mazen Ibrahim noted that the language used was defensive, not offensive.

“If one dismantles the linguistic structure of the statement, the complexity of Hezbollah’s position becomes clear,” Ibrahim said. “The secretary-general spoke of ‘confronting aggression’, which refers to a defensive posture. … He did not explicitly threaten to attack Israel or launch revenge operations.”

This caution is rooted in a new strategic reality. Since the collapse of Bashar al-Assad’s government in Syria in late 2024, the “land bridge” that supplied Hezbollah has been severed. Ali Akbar Dareini, a Tehran-based researcher, noted that this loss “cut the ground link with Lebanon”, leaving the group physically isolated.

Now with top leaders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) killed alongside Khamenei, Hezbollah appears paralysed – caught between a battered domestic front in Lebanon and a vacuum of orders from Tehran.

The Houthis: Solidarity meets survival

In Yemen, the Houthis face an even more volatile calculus.

In his first televised address after the strikes on Iran began on Saturday, the group’s leader, Abdel-Malik al-Houthi, declared his forces “fully prepared for any developments”. Yet his rhetoric notably emphasised that “Iran is strong” and “its response will be decisive,” a phrasing that analysts interpreted as an attempt to deflect the immediate burden of war away from the Houthis.

The Houthis are under immense pressure. While they have successfully disrupted Red Sea shipping and fired missiles at Tel Aviv, they now face a renewed threat at home.

The internationally recognised Yemeni government, having won a power struggle against southern separatists, has sensed a shift in momentum. Defence Minister Taher al-Aqili recently declared: “The index of operations is heading towards the capital, Sanaa,” which the Houthis control. The statement signalled a potential ground offensive to retake Houthi territory.

This places the Houthis in a bind. While Houthi negotiator Mohammed Abdulsalam recently met with Iranian official Ali Larijani in Muscat, Oman, to discuss “unity of the arenas”, the reality on the ground is different. Engaging in a war for Iran could leave the Houthis’ home front exposed to government forces backed by regional rivals.

“Expanding the circle of targeting will only result in expanding the circle of confrontation,” the Houthi-affiliated Supreme Political Council warned in a statement that threatened escalation but also implicitly acknowledged the high cost of a wider war.

Iraq: The internal time bomb

Perhaps nowhere is the dilemma more acute than in Iraq, where the lines between the state and the “resistance” are dangerously blurred.

Iran-aligned militias, many of which operate under the state-sanctioned Popular Mobilisation Forces, are now caught in a direct standoff with the US. Tensions have simmered since late 2024 when Ibrahim Al-Sumaidaie, an adviser to Iraq’s prime minister, revealed that Washington had threatened to dismantle these groups by force, a warning that led to his resignation under pressure from militia leaders.

Today, that threat looms larger than ever. Unlike Hezbollah or the Houthis, these groups are technically part of the Iraqi security apparatus. A retaliation from Iraqi soil would not just risk a militia war but also a direct conflict between the US and the Iraqi state.

With the IRGC commanders who once mediated these tensions now dead, the “restraining hand” is gone. Isolated militia leaders may now decide to strike US bases of their own accord, dragging Baghdad into a war the government has desperately tried to avoid.

Resistance without a head

Khamenei’s assassination has essentially shattered the command-and-control structure of the “axis of resistance”.

The network was built on three pillars: the ideological authority of the supreme leader, the logistical coordination of the IRGC and the geographic connection through Syria. Today, all three are broken.

“The most important damage to Iran’s security interests is the severing of the ground link,” Dareini said. With Khamenei gone, the “spiritual link” is also severed.

What remains is a fragmented landscape. In Lebanon, Hezbollah is too exhausted to open a northern front. In Yemen, the Houthis face a potential domestic offensive. In Iraq, militias risk collapsing the state they live in.

When the dust settles in Tehran, the region will face a dangerous unpredictability. The “axis of resistance” is no longer a coordinated army. It is a collection of angry, heavily armed militias, each calculating its own survival in a world where the orders from Tehran have suddenly stopped coming.

Israel has carried out heavy strikes in the southern suburbs of Lebanon’s capital Beirut after Hezbollah launched an attack on northern Israel in retaliation for the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Israel’s prime minister says strikes on Tehran will increase in the coming days, with US support, to do what Benjamin Netanyahu says he’s ‘hoped to do for 40 years’. Israel and the US killed Iran’s Supreme Leader on Saturday in a renewed war on Iran.

Israelis filmed the moment an Iranian missile broke through Israel’s air defence systems to strike a target in West Jerusalem, in retaliation for Israel’s war on Iran.

The Lebanese armed group has not taken action against Israel or US assets since the attacks on Iran began on Saturday.

The Lebanese armed group Hezbollah has pledged to fulfil its duty in “confronting aggression” after attacks by Israel and the United States killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

In a statement on Sunday, the Iran-aligned group offered condolences for Khamenei, who was killed along with other Iranian leaders in a joint US-Israeli attack on Iran early on Saturday.

“That the criminal American and Zionist [Israeli] aggression targeted our guardian, our leader, the leader of the Nation, Imam Khamenei (may his soul be sanctified), along with a group of leaders, officials, and innocent sons of the Iranian people, represents the height of criminality,” the group said.

“We will fulfill our duty in confronting aggression, confident in Allah’s victory, guidance, and support… No matter how great the sacrifices, we will not abandon the field of honour and resistance, nor the confrontation against American tyranny and Zionist criminality, in defence of our land, our dignity, and our independent choices,” it added.

So far, Hezbollah, which operates as a largely independent armed force within Lebanon, has not taken action against Israel or US assets since the attacks began on Saturday.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun said on Sunday that “the decision of war and peace rests solely with the Lebanese state”, after an emergency meeting of the country’s Higher Defence Council.

On Saturday, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said he would not accept anyone “dragging the country into adventures that threaten its security and unity”.

“In light of the serious developments unfolding in the region, I once again call on all Lebanese to act with wisdom and patriotism, placing Lebanon and the Lebanese people’s interests above any other consideration,” Salam said in a statement sent to the Reuters news agency.

Lebanon is continuing its attempts to recover after a yearlong war between Hezbollah and Israel that ended after the November 2024 ceasefire. However, Israel has continued to target Lebanon in violation of the agreement and has maintained several military outposts within Lebanese territory.

Thousands mourn in Beirut

On Sunday, Hezbollah organised a gathering of thousands of supporters in the capital, Beirut, to mourn Khamenei, as they chanted, “Death to America, death to Israel”.

Zainab al-Moussawi, a 23-year-old teacher, told the AFP news agency that the death of Khamenei was “very painful. It is a tragedy.”

“It felt just like the martyrdom of the Sayyed,” she added, referring to Israel’s killing of former Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah in 2024.

Hezbollah also called on mosques to recite the Quran and organise other mourning ceremonies in different parts of the country where the group holds influence to mark Khamenei’s death.

According to President Trump, the United States attacked Iran because the Iranian regime posed “imminent threats” to the U.S. and its allies, including through its use of terrorist proxies and continued pursuit of nuclear weapons.

“Its menacing activities directly endanger the United States, our troops, our bases overseas and our allies throughout the world,” he said in a recorded statement Saturday.

According to leading Democrats in Congress, Trump’s justification is questionable, especially given his claims of having “completely obliterated” Iran’s nuclear capabilities in separate U.S. bombings last year.

“Everything I have heard from the administration before and after these strikes on Iran confirms this is a war of choice with no strategic endgame,” said Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee and part of a small group of congressional leaders — the Gang of Eight — who were briefed on the operation by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

That divide is bound to remain an issue politically heading into this year’s midterm elections, and could be a liability for Republicans — especially considering that some in the “America First” wing of the MAGA base were raising their own objections, citing Trump’s 2024 campaign pledges to extricate the U.S. from foreign wars, not start new ones.

The debate echoed a similar if less immediate one around President George W. Bush’s decision to go to war in Iraq following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, also based on claims that “weapons of mass destruction” posed an immediate threat. Those claims were later disproved by multiple findings that Iraq had no such arsenal, fueling recriminations from both political parties for years.

The latest divide also intensified unease over Congress ceding its wartime powers to the White House, which for years has assumed sweeping authority to attack foreign adversaries without direct congressional input in the name of addressing terrorism or preventing immediate harm to the nation or its troops.

Even prior to the weekend bombings, Democrats including Sen. Adam Schiff of California were pushing Congress to pass a resolution barring the Trump administration from attacking Iran without explicit congressional authorization.

“President Trump must come to Congress before using military force unless absolutely necessary to defend the United States from an imminent attack,” Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), a member of the armed services and foreign relations committees, said in a statement Thursday.

In justifying the daylight strikes that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei just two days later, Trump accused the Iranian government of having “waged an unending campaign of bloodshed and mass murder” for nearly half a century — including through attacks on U.S. military assets and commercial shipping vessels abroad — and of having “armed, trained and funded terrorist militias” in multiple countries, including Hezbollah and Hamas.

Trump said that after the U.S. bombed Iran last summer, it had warned Tehran “never to resume” its pursuit of nuclear weapons. “Instead, they attempted to rebuild their nuclear program and to continue developing long-range missiles that can now threaten our very good friends and allies in Europe, our troops stationed overseas, and could soon reach the American homeland,” he said.

Other Republican leaders largely backed the president.

“The United States did not start this conflict, but we will finish it. If you kill or threaten Americans anywhere in the world — as Iran has — then we will hunt you down, and we will kill you,” said Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.

“Every president has talked about the threat posed by the Iranian regime. President Trump is the one with the courage to take bold, decisive action,” said Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi.

While Iran’s coordination with and sponsorship of groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas are well known, Trump’s claims about its ongoing development of nuclear weapons systems are less established — and the administration has provided little evidence to back them up.

Democrats seized on that lack of fresh intelligence in their responses to the attacks, contrasting Trump’s latest claims about imminent threats with his assertion after the separate summer bombings that the U.S. had all but eliminated Iran’s nuclear aspirations.

“Let’s be clear: The Iranian regime is horrible. But I have seen no imminent threat to the United States that would justify putting American troops in harm’s way,” said Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee and a member of the Gang of Eight. “What is the motivation here? Is it Iran’s nuclear program? Their missiles? Regime change?”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement that the Trump administration “has not provided Congress and the American people with critical details about the scope and immediacy of the threat,” and must do so.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said the Trump administration needs congressional authority to wage such attacks barring “exigent circumstances,” and didn’t have it.

“The Trump administration must explain itself to the American people and Congress immediately, provide an ironclad justification for this act of war, clearly define the national security objective and articulate a plan to avoid another costly, prolonged military quagmire in the Middle East,” he said.

After the U.S. military announced Sunday that three U.S. service personnel were killed and five others seriously wounded in the attacks, the demands for a clearer justification and new constraints on Trump only increased.

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Fremont) said Sunday he is optimistic that Democrats will be unified in trying to pass the war powers resolution, and also that some Republicans will join them, given that the strikes have been unpopular among a portion of the MAGA base.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who partnered with Khanna to force the release of the Epstein files, has said he will work with him again to push a congressional vote on war with Iran, which he said was “not ‘America First.’”

Benjamin Radd, a political scientist and senior fellow at the UCLA Burkle Center for International Relations, said that whether or not Iran represented an “imminent” threat to the U.S. depends not just on its nuclear capabilities, but on its broader desire and ability to inflict pain on the U.S. and its allies — as was made clear to both the U.S. and Israel after the Hamas attacks on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, which Iran praised.

“If you are Israel or the United States, that’s imminent,” he said.

What happens next, Radd said, will largely depend on whether remaining Iranian leaders stick to Khamenei’s hard-line policies, or decide to negotiate anew with the U.S. He expects they might do the latter, because “it’s a fundamentalist regime, it’s not a suicidal regime,” and it’s now clear that the U.S. and Israel have the capabilities to take out Iranian leaders, Iran has little ability to defend itself, and China and Russia are not rushing to its aid.

How the strikes are viewed moving forward may also depend on what those leaders decide to do next, said Kevan Harris, an associate professor of sociology who teaches courses on Iran and Middle East politics at the UCLA International Institute.

If the conflict remains relatively contained, it could become a political win for Trump, with questions about the justification falling away. But if it spirals out of control, such questions are only likely to grow, as occurred in Iraq when things started to deteriorate there, he said.

Israel and the U.S. are currently betting that the conflict will remain manageable, which could turn out to be true, Harris said, but “the problem with war is you never really know what might happen.”

On Sunday, Iran launched retaliatory attacks on Israel and the wider Gulf region. Trump said the campaign against Iran continued “unabated,” though he may be willing to negotiate with the nation’s new leaders. It was unclear when Congress might take up the war powers measure.