US-Israel war on Iran

Wave of Israeli air attacks launched as ground offensive widens in south where Hezbollah are fighting Israeli forces.

Israel has attacked a building in Bashoura, a neighbourhood in the heart of Beirut, Lebanon’s National News Agency (NNA) reported, with a blast and smoke rising over the area shortly after Israel issued an evacuation threat for the site.

The attack was part of a deadly wave of Israeli strikes across Lebanon that killed at least 20 people and wounded 24 on Wednesday, according to the country’s Ministry of Public Health, with raids stretching from the capital through southern and eastern parts of the country, a devastating front in the wider United States-Israel war against Iran embroiling the region.

At least six people were killed in the air strikes in Beirut, with dozens injured.

Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Beirut, Zeina Khodr, reported that intense Israeli attacks hit multiple regions across Lebanon, including central Beirut, overnight.

Speaking from in front of a 15-storey building struck in one of the attacks, Khodr said its lower floors had been targeted a week earlier. In the early hours, however, the structure was completely demolished, with the Israeli army claiming Hezbollah had stored cash there.

“You can see the widespread damage across this whole neighbourhood,” Khodr said.

Israel’s military said it had launched what it described as limited ground operations in southern Lebanon, issuing evacuation threats for residents of four towns near the Zahrani River and the Tyre area, warning them to head north immediately.

Lebanon’s NNA also reported strikes on Tyre and the nearby area of Al-Burj Al-Shamali in the pre-dawn hours.

At least four people were killed in an Israeli attack that targeted four houses in the town of Sahmar in eastern Lebanon’s Bekaa Valley.

The intensifying assault has now killed at least 912 people in Lebanon, including 111 children, and wounded more than 2,200 since Israel launched its offensive on March 2, according to Lebanese Health Ministry figures.

More than one million people have been forced from their homes. The United Nations warned on Tuesday that Israeli attacks on residential buildings and civilian infrastructure may constitute war crimes under international humanitarian law.

A spokesperson for the UN human rights office said that deliberately targeting civilians or civilian objects “amounts to a war crime”, adding that Israel’s sweeping displacement orders for southern Lebanon may themselves violate international law.

Khodr said that Hezbollah’s secretary general, Naim Qassem, last night laid down conditions for the war to end, including Israel stopping attacks, displaced people being permitted to return to their homes, those detained over the last two years by Israel being released and the Israeli army withdrawing.

Across southern Lebanon, Khodr said Hezbollah was “still present in the area, trying to repel the Israeli army’s advance”, adding that Hezbollah’s aim was not just territorial control of the region, but preventing Israel from gaining new positions in the country.

The conflict was ignited on February 28 when US and Israeli forces assassinated Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in Tehran, prompting Hezbollah to launch rockets into northern Israel on March 2.

Israel has since killed more than 2,000 people across Iran and Lebanon in its attacks.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, a staunch Israeli ally, added his voice to growing international concern, warning that Israel’s ground offensive in Lebanon was an “error” that risked worsening what he described as an already dire humanitarian situation.

Qatar, UAE, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia report new blasts, interceptions, with war edging to 3-week mark.

Iran has fired missiles and drones at several Gulf Arab nations, which have sought to intercept them, in a now-daily fallout from the United States-Israel war launched on Iran nearly three weeks ago that has engulfed the Middle East with deaths, destruction, assassinations, and an energy crisis spreading far beyond the region.

Early Tuesday, Qatar’s Ministry of Defence said its armed forces intercepted a missile attack against the country.

The Kuwait National Guard said it shot down an unmanned aircraft at dawn. The statement came hours after the Kuwaiti army said it was intercepting hostile missile and drone attacks.

The UAE, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain have also reported intercepting missiles and drones in recent hours.

Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Defense reported the interception and destruction of a drone in the Eastern Region.

Earlier Tuesday, the UAE Ministry of Defence said the country’s air defences were “currently responding to incoming missile and drone threats from Iran”. The announcement came four hours after another reported attack from Iran. Later, a loud bang was heard in Dubai as authorities said air defences were dealing with a missile threat.

Al Jazeera’s Zein Basravi, reporting from Dubai, said, “The UAE has been the hardest hit by Iran’s retaliation. For instance, there have been 3000 different projectiles – missiles and drones – fired at GCC countries by Iran in terms of its retaliation. More than half, well over half, have targeted places in the UAE. Overnight was no different … Multiple explosions heard throughout the city.

“That glow of defensive weapons and interceptions in the night skies, something that has become all too familiar, not just in Dubai, but in cities across the GCC. Once again seen over the skies here.

“Dubai’s media office confirming that they were the result of air defence interception operations,” he added.

There have been several deaths in the Gulf nations, where an economic effect is also being acutely felt since the war began.

Gulf economies bear brunt of Iran war

The economies of the Gulf are suffering some of the worst damage.

Iran has launched continuous attacks on Gulf states since the onset of the conflict on February 28, arguing that it is attacking military bases used by the US for the war. Gulf nations have rejected Tehran’s claims, insisting the attacks on them are unjustified.

The Iranian strikes have upended energy production and inflicted major disruption to tourism and travel, putting the region at risk of some of the most severe economic harm since the 1990-1991 Gulf War.

After nearly three weeks of war, the economic effect on the region has already been substantial.

Middle Eastern oil producers’ daily output declined from 21 million barrels to 14 million barrels after a little more than a week of conflict as they deal with the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, according to Rystad Energy.

Iran’s foreign minister is pushing back after the killings of top officials Ali Larijani and Basij commander Gholamreza Soleimani. Abbas Araghchi says the Islamic Republic is built to withstand shocks, insisting that no single figure, no matter how powerful, can destabilise the system.

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy says Moscow and Tehran are ‘brothers in hatred’; claims Iran’s drones ‘contain Russian components’.

More than 200 Ukrainian military experts are in the Gulf region and wider Middle East helping governments in their defence against Iran’s drone attacks, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said.

In an address to dozens of members of the United Kingdom Parliament in London on Tuesday, the Ukrainian leader said 201 Ukrainian anti-drone experts are in the region and another 34 “are ready to deploy”.

“These are military experts, experts who know how to help, how to defend against Shahed drones,” Zelenskyy said in his speech, referring to the Iranian-designed “kamikaze” drones that Russia has been using in its war against Ukraine since 2022.

“Our teams are already in the Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and on the way to Kuwait,” the Ukrainian leader said.

“We are working with several other countries – agreements are already in place. We do not want this terror of the Iranian regime against its neighbours to succeed,” he said.

Last week, the Ukrainian leader said military teams had been sent to several Gulf states and Jordan.

Zelenskyy, who met with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and NATO chief Mark Rutte earlier on Tuesday, said Russia had received the Shahed-136 drones from the Iranians, who had “taught Russia how to launch them and gave it the technology to produce them”.

“Russia then upgraded them. And now we have clear evidence that Iranian Shaheds used in the region contain Russian components,” Zelenskyy said, describing the drones as designed for “low-cost destruction of expensive critical infrastructure”.

“So what is happening around Iran today is not a faraway war for us, because of the cooperation between Russia and Iran,” he said.

“The regimes in Russia and Iran are brothers in hatred, and that is why they are brothers in weapons. And we want regimes built on hatred to never win – in anything,” he added.

The Ukrainian leader then addressed his country’s newly developed prowess in drone warfare and manufacturing, claiming that 90 percent of Russian losses on the front lines in Ukraine are being “caused by our drones”.

Ukraine has moved on from making sea and aerial drones to producing interceptors that target drones, he said, adding that Ukraine is capable of producing at least 2,000 interceptors per day – half of which are required for its own defence and the remainder available for use by Kyiv’s allies.

“If a Shahed needs to be stopped in the Emirates – we can do it. If it needs to be stopped in Europe or the United Kingdom – we can do it. It is a matter of technology, investment, and cooperation,” he said.

While Ukraine has become one of the world’s leading producers of sophisticated, battlefield-proven drone interceptors, US President Donald Trump has said he does not need Ukraine’s help with countering Tehran’s drones targeting military targets in the Middle East.

After meeting with Zelenskyy at 10 Downing Street, Starmer said Russian President Vladimir Putin “can’t be the one who benefits from the conflict in Iran, whether that’s oil prices or the dropping of sanctions”.

During Zelenskyy’s visit on Tuesday, London and Kyiv signed a deal on a “defence partnership”, which is said to combine “Ukraine’s expertise and the UK’s industrial base to manufacture and supply drones and innovative capabilities”.

Witness videos captured missile interceptors launching and burning debris raining from the sky near the Dubai International Convention and Exhibition Centre.

The 2026 World Cup matches will be played as per schedule announced last year, the football organisation says.

The world’s top football organisation, FIFA, has said the 2026 World Cup matches will take place per the schedule announced last year, shutting down Iran’s hopes of having its matches moved from the United States to Mexico due to the ongoing US-Israeli war on Iran.

“FIFA is in regular contact with all participating member associations, including Iran, to discuss planning for the FIFA World Cup 2026,” the organisation’s statement said. “FIFA is looking forward to all participating teams competing as per the match schedule announced on 6 December 2025.”

Following the outbreak of the war on February 28, Iran’s participation in the games has been cast in doubt.

Last week, US President Donald Trump said Iran was welcome to come to his country for its matches, but added: “I really don’t believe it is appropriate that they be there, for their own life and safety.”

In response to Trump’s comments, Iran’s football team said in a post on social media that “no one can exclude Iran’s national team from the World Cup”.

More recently, on Monday, Iranian football chief Mehdi Taj said on social media that “when Trump has explicitly stated that he cannot ensure the security of the Iranian national team, we will certainly not travel to America”.

“We are currently negotiating with FIFA to hold Iran’s matches in the World Cup in Mexico,” Taj said.

Iran’s Ambassador to Mexico Abolfazl Pasandideh also condemned on Monday Washington’s “lack of cooperation regarding visa issuance and the provisions of logistical support” for the Iranian delegation.

The 2026 World Cup is set to be played in three countries for the first time ever: the US, Mexico and Canada.

The first game is scheduled for June 11, and will be played between South Africa and Mexico.

But when asked if Mexico could host Iran’s games, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said on Tuesday that the country was prepared to host its first-round matches.

“Mexico maintains diplomatic relations with every country in the world, therefore, we will wait to see what FIFA decides,” Sheinbaum said.

Iran was the second Asian team, after Japan, to qualify for the World Cup, securing its place almost a year ago after topping its qualifying group.

They are currently scheduled to play New Zealand and Belgium in Los Angeles, and Egypt in Seattle.

US President Donald Trump has reacted to the resignation of the US National Counterterrorism Centre’s director, Joe Kent, saying that he couldn’t work with somebody who didn’t believe Iran was a threat. Trump also said his decision to bomb Iran avoided a ‘nuclear holocaust’.

A man was rescued from under the rubble of a destroyed building following an Israeli strike in the Iranian city of Hamedan, as the US and Israel continue to bombard the country.

In a devastated enclave where more than two million Palestinians remain crammed into a shrinking strip of land under the overwhelming shadow of Israeli military occupation and bombardment, daily survival is tethered to a fragile October “ceasefire”.

But as Israeli and US bombs rain down on Iran, and Tehran retaliates across the region, that battered truce faces a breaking point, prompting an unprecedented diplomatic manoeuvre: direct talks between United States President Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace” and Hamas.

Envoys from the new body, personally headed by Trump to oversee post-war Gaza, but with more far-reaching designs, met with Hamas representatives in the Egyptian capital over the weekend, according to the Reuters news agency.

The meetings aimed to safeguard the “ceasefire”, which has been under even more severe strain since the regional war began on February 28.

Following the talks, Israel announced it would partially reopen the Rafah border crossing between Gaza and Egypt on Wednesday. The crossing, Gaza’s sole pedestrian lifeline outside direct Israeli control, was shut when the Iran offensive began.

Despite the diplomatic push, violence in the enclave persists. Israeli strikes on Sunday killed at least 13 Palestinians including two boys, a pregnant woman, and nine police officers, serving as a stark reminder of Israel’s all-encompassing military grip on the territory.

A pragmatic shift or tactical ploy?

While the talks mark a notable engagement by Washington, analysts view the move not as a legitimisation of the Palestinian group, but as a calculated tactic underpinned by the threat of renewed violence.

Abdullah Aqrabawi, a Palestinian political analyst, noted that Washington’s willingness to meet Hamas reflects a stark reality on the ground. “There is a comprehensive, realistic acknowledgement that the main military, political, and social actor in the Gaza Strip is Hamas,” Aqrabawi told Al Jazeera.

However, he warned against viewing the meetings as a fundamental shift in US policy. In the era of the Trump administration, diplomatic meetings do not equate with political recognition. Instead, Aqrabawi argued, the approach is framed by the constant threat of a return to a “war of extermination”.

The ultimate goal of these talks, he explained, is to empower a newly formed technocratic committee in Gaza to build a social base capable of challenging the armed group.

The illusion of ‘reverse blackmail’

Initial reports suggested that Hamas had threatened to abandon the “ceasefire” if Gaza border restrictions continued, purportedly using the regional chaos of the Iran war to force Israel’s hand.

Aqrabawi dismissed this assessment, noting that Hamas has consistently expressed a desire to avoid a return to full-scale war. Rather than a successful Palestinian pressure campaign, he said the reopening of the Rafah crossing serves a different strategic purpose for Washington and Tel Aviv.

“Any facilities, whether the Rafah crossing or allowing aid entry, come through the “Board of Peace” and the new technocratic committee formed in the Gaza Strip,” Aqrabawi said. “It is not a response to negotiations or Palestinian pressure, but rather in the context of allowing this committee to penetrate Palestinian society.”

He added that this aims to establish a security foundation that allows for the disarmament of the resistance, even if it leads to internal Palestinian civil conflict.

Disarmament and the 20-point plan

Prior to the regional escalation, Trump’s flagship Middle East initiative – a 20-point plan for Gaza – had partially halted the mass killings and secured the release of Israeli military captives and some Palestinian prisoners. In exchange, Hamas accepted a ceasefire that left the Israeli military occupying more than half of the enclave.

But the second phase of Trump’s plan, which hinges on Hamas laying down its weapons in exchange for amnesty and reconstruction, remains deadlocked. While some might assume the regional conflict gives Hamas leverage to scrap the disarmament clause entirely, Aqrabawi suggested the opposite is unfolding.

The US and Israel, heavily engaged in Iran, are likely intensifying pressure on the Palestinian group to secure a swift, enforceable victory in Gaza. “The pressure happening today on the occupation government and the American perspective of the war with Iran may push them to pressure Hamas to accomplish this task as quickly as possible,” Aqrabawi said.

Yet, Hamas remains resolute. The group views its weapons as essential for resisting the occupation and forming the foundation of future Palestinian security institutions.

As Washington and Tel Aviv attempt to use the spectre of renewed genocide to engineer Gaza’s political future, the reality for the Palestinians trapped inside the enclave remains unchanged. For them, the partial reopening of a single border crossing is not a diplomatic breakthrough, but a fleeting gasp of air in a besieged Gaza Strip where daily survival is held hostage to the demands of the military occupation.

The Middle East conflict risks adding a staggering 45 million to acute hunger levels, warns the UN’s World Food Programme.

Tens of millions more people will face acute hunger if the United States-Israel war on Iran, and its reverberations through Iran’s retaliation, continue through to June, the United Nations warned.

“If the Middle East conflict continues through June, an additional 45 million people could be pushed into acute hunger by price rises,” Carl Skau, the deputy executive director of the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP), said on Tuesday.

“This would take global hunger levels to an all-time record, and it’s a terrible, terrible prospect,” Skau said, with 319 million people, already a historic high, currently acutely food insecure.

The US-Israeli attacks on Iran that began on February 28 have choked up key humanitarian aid routes, delaying life-saving shipments to some of the world’s worst crises.

Skau said shipping costs are up 18 percent since the war began and that some have had to be rerouted.

The extra costs come on top of deep spending cuts by the WFP, as donors focus more on defence, he added.

Hunger crises in Gaza, Sudan

In Gaza, residents are rushing to stockpile dwindling goods as border closures and the Iran war further strain already fragile supplies, with shortages worsening across the besieged enclave as Israel presses on with its genocidal war there.

Israel is set to partially reopen Gaza’s Rafah crossing with Egypt on Wednesday, ending a two-week shutdown that has deepened an already catastrophic humanitarian crisis in the decimated territory.

Israel shut the crossing the same day it and the US launched strikes on Iran, citing “security” reasons.

The World Health Organization’s regional director for the Eastern Mediterranean warned last week that only about 200 trucks a day were entering Gaza, far short of the estimated daily requirement of 600.

Meanwhile, more than 21 million people in Sudan, nearly half of the population, face acute hunger. Famine has been confirmed in areas where months of fighting have made access for aid workers largely impossible.

In January, the UN warned that aid to Sudan could run out within months unless hundreds of millions of additional dollars are pledged.

Three years of brutal war between the military government and paramilitary Rapid Support Forces have killed tens of thousands of people and displaced 14 million.

Israel’s Defence Minister Israel Katz says Ali Larijani, Iran’s security chief, has been killed in an Israeli strike overnight. There has been no confirmation from Iran.

All eyes are on the Strait of Hormuz.

The longer it remains closed, the greater the damage to the global economy.

Iran continues to block tankers from shipping close to 20 percent of the world’s oil supply.

That is roughly twice the disruption the world suffered during the energy shock of the 1970s.

Big oil shocks have historically led to considerable economic turmoil, high inflation, stagnation and recession.

Oil and gas prices are already surging, and economies are expected to slow.

From American consumers to Chinese factories and European households, people across the world are already feeling the effect.

Islamabad, Pakistan — The war launched by the United States and Israel on Iran has already killed more than 1,400 people, set off retaliatory attacks by Tehran targeting Gulf nations and Israel, and pushed global oil prices above $100 a barrel.

Now, eighteen days into the conflict, aid agencies and countries neighbouring Iran are increasingly concerned about a potential refugee crisis.

The United Nations refugee agency, UNHCR, estimates that 3.2 million people have already been displaced in Iran since US-Israeli strikes began on February 28. For now, the number of people physically crossing Iran’s borders remains comparatively modest. But this is what could happen next, and has put Iran’s neighbours on high alert.

Iran borders seven countries: Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkiye and Turkmenistan. Iraq shares the longest frontier, stretching for almost 1,600km (994 miles).

Each of these states faces its own political pressures, economic limitations and security concerns.

But pressure on the ground in Iran is mounting. The country’s Red Crescent Society reports that more than 10,000 civilian sites have been damaged since the war began, including 65 schools and 32 medical facilities, while more than 1,400 people have been killed in the US-Israel attacks. Strikes have hit residential areas in Tehran, Shiraz and Isfahan.

Meanwhile, commercial flights out of Iran have been suspended as airspace is closed.

Eldaniz Gusseinov, head of research at the geopolitical advisory firm Nightingale International, noted that because strikes have so far been concentrated largely on Tehran and western and southwestern Iran, other parts of the country — especially provinces bordering Turkmenistan, Afghanistan and Pakistan are absorbing much of the internal displacement.

“If the strike pattern remains the same, internally displaced people inside Iran will increasingly concentrate in provinces located near those states, creating the preconditions for cross-border movement,” the Almaty-based analyst told Al Jazeera.

And things could get worse. If Tehran, a city of about 10 million people, were to lose its electricity grid or water supply in a US-Israel attack, for instance, residents could be forced to leave en masse.

“Infrastructure destruction does not produce the gradual, manageable flows that the Syrian war initially generated. It produces sudden, massive displacement, driven by the collapse of basic urban services,” Gusseinov said.

Turkiye fears repeat of Syrian migration crisis

Among Iran’s neighbours, only Turkiye, Iraq and Pakistan have extensive experience of hosting large refugee populations.

Imtiaz Baloch, an independent researcher focusing on conflicts in Pakistan and Central Asia, said that if the crisis in Iran deepens, many Iranians could seek refuge in neighbouring states, particularly Iraq and Turkiye.

Analysts say no country faces greater political exposure than Turkiye.

“Turkiye is currently hosting many refugees from Syria and other countries. A new influx of Iranian migrants would likely intensify the humanitarian burden and create new challenges for both host countries and international relief agencies in the coming days,” Baloch said.

Turkiye shares a 530km (329-mile) border with Iran and allows visa-free entry for Iranian citizens. It already hosts the world’s largest refugee population, including roughly 3.6 million Syrians, and anti-immigrant sentiment has hardened within domestic politics over the past decade.

Turkiye’s interior minister, Mustafa Çiftçi, said earlier in March that the government had prepared three contingency plans for the war in Iran.

The first involves intercepting migration flows within Iranian territory before they reach the border. The second proposes establishing buffer zones along the frontier. The third would allow refugees to enter Turkiye under controlled conditions as a last resort.

Turkish authorities say they have already strengthened the border with Iran, adding 380km (236 miles) of concrete wall, 203 optical towers and 43 observation posts – undertaken, according to a Turkish Ministry of National Defence statement issued in January, as the US was building up its armada in the Gulf late last year.

“Although there is currently no mass migration detection at our borders, additional measures have been taken on the border line, and these measures will be implemented if needed,” the Defence Ministry stated on January 15.

So far, this has not been necessary. According to Turkish government data on the movement of people from Iran, 5,010 entered Turkiye from between March 1 and 3, while 5,495 exited.

But Turkiye has felt the effects of the war’s spillover in other ways. On March 9, NATO confirmed it had intercepted an Iranian ballistic missile over Turkish airspace. The debris landed near Gaziantep, in the western-most part of the country, about 50km (31 miles) from the Syrian border. Iran denied that it was behind the attack on Turkiye.

Crisis on an unprecedented scale?

What makes the current situation in Iran particularly urgent is the scale of its population, say analysts.

Syria had approximately 21 million people at the start of its civil war. Iran has roughly 90 million. The Syrian conflict caused more than 13 million people to be displaced, including more than 6 million who fled the country.

A proportionate displacement from Iran would represent a humanitarian crisis with few modern parallels. To put it into perspective, if a country of 90 million experienced the exact same scale of crisis as Syria, nearly 56 million people would be forced to flee their homes, and nearly 26 million of them would become international refugees.

Gusseinov said such a scale of displacement and the capacity of international aid agencies is “fundamentally mismatched”.

Furthermore, Iran itself hosts one of the world’s largest refugee populations: about 3.7 million displaced people, most of them from Afghanistan.

“Any mass displacement from Iran, therefore, creates a dual crisis: Iranian civilians fleeing outward, and Afghan and Iraqi refugees who were already in Iran being displaced a second time, or pushed back to countries that cannot absorb them,” he said.

Iraq and the South Caucasus face difficult choices

Although most population movement is still taking place within Iran rather than across its borders, Iran’s neighbours do have cause for concern, analysts say.

“Iran’s neighbouring countries are already dealing with their own crises, which limits their ability to absorb a potential refugee influx. Countries such as Syria, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, and Afghanistan are facing varying degrees of economic, political, or security challenges. These internal pressures make it difficult for them to accommodate a large influx of refugees,” Gusseinov told Al Jazeera.

Iraq, which shares Iran’s longest border, faces a particularly complex situation.

The country is not only a potential destination for Iranian refugees, but has also been caught in military exchanges between Washington and Tehran. US forces have targeted armed groups operating from Iraqi territory, while Iran and pro-Iran armed groups have struck – or attempted to strike – US military and diplomatic positions inside the country.

The UN’s International Organization for Migration says disruptions on the Iranian side of the border have led to the closure of several crossing points, although Iraqi crossings remain technically open. Meanwhile, the UNHCR says it is monitoring developments closely, and that the Iraqi government would lead any emergency refugee response.

The semi-autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, which, unlike the rest of the country, still allows visa-free entry for Iranian passport holders, adds another layer of complexity.

The region hosts several Kurdish armed groups, some of which have reportedly been in discussions with Washington about receiving military support in return for joining the war against Iran. The development has prompted Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to strike Kurdish positions inside Iraqi territory.

Baghdad has publicly stated that it will not allow its territory to be used to infiltrate Iran, but experts on the region say its ability to enforce the position is limited.

Further north, the South Caucasus states of Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia have each expressed concern while attempting to carefully balance relations with both Washington and Tehran.

Azerbaijan has closed its land borders to routine traffic, requiring government approval for any crossing, while Armenia’s border with Iran, which is just 44km (27 miles) long, remains open.

“Armenia is a small economy already absorbing Russian and Ukrainian migrants,” Gusseinov said.

Pakistan and Afghanistan confront overlapping crises

To Iran’s east lie Pakistan and Afghanistan, each grappling with existing refugee pressures.

According to the UNHCR, since October 2023, about 5.4 million Afghans have returned to Afghanistan from Iran and Pakistan, many not by choice.

Following the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan and the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, a huge wave of Afghans sought refuge across the country’s borders, fearful of economic collapse and security threats.

The UN and international migration agencies estimate that between 1 and 1.5 million Afghans fled to Iran in the immediate aftermath of the US withdrawal, pushing the total Afghan population in Iran to upwards of 5 or 6 million.

Concurrently, hundreds of thousands of newly displaced Afghans crossed into Pakistan, joining a long-established refugee community there and swelling the total number of Afghans in the country to more than 3 million.

In response to this influx and citing domestic economic and security pressures, both Pakistan and Iran initiated aggressive mass deportation campaigns, forcing millions back into Afghanistan. Between late 2023 and the end of 2025, between 2.8 million and 3.5 million Afghans are thought to have been sent back.

Pakistan’s stringent repatriation plans pushed out more than 1.3 million people, while Iran drastically accelerated its expulsions, deporting nearly 2 million individuals in 2025 alone.

According to the UNHCR, in 2026 so far, more than 232,500 Afghans have returned to their country, including 146,206 from Pakistan and 86,253 from Iran.

The primary concern now is that the war in Iran could accelerate these returns, pushing people into communities already struggling to cope and potentially triggering further onward migration. The UNHCR has also warned that largescale and hurried returns of refugees could trigger further instability in the region.

Further complicating the situation, Pakistan and Afghanistan have been engaged in fighting, as Islamabad claims that Afghanistan is providing a safe haven to armed groups launching attacks at Pakistan. Kabul has consistently denied the presence of any such groups on its soil.

Another bout of hostilities in October 2025 led Pakistan to close its borders with Afghanistan. Since then, Afghanistan’s trade and economic ties with Iran have deepened.

“Destabilisation of the Iranian economy, therefore, hits Afghanistan through two channels simultaneously: reduced trade flows and refugee return surges,” Gusseinov said.

Meanwhile, Pakistan faces its own geographical and security challenges.

The country’s border with Iran runs through Balochistan, its largest but most volatile province, where separatist sentiment has simmered for decades. The province has seen an increasing number of attacks by armed groups seeking independence from Pakistan. In February this year, Pakistan’s military concluded a weeklong security operation in the province, and claimed it had killed 216 fighters in targeted offensives.

While Balochistan’s provincial officials say they have sufficient resources to accommodate refugees if large numbers begin arriving across the southern border, researcher Baloch said the reality was more complicated. Any refugee crisis, he said, could make the situation in Balochistan difficult for Islamabad to manage.

“Balochistan’s porous border is next to Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan province, a region that has historically been home to various separatist groups. Any significant influx of refugees across this border could impose additional security and economic costs on Pakistan,” Baloch said.

“Right is right, wrong is wrong, and Trump’s wrong.” Former Marine Brian McGinnis, whose hand was broken by police and a congressman earlier this month in a protest at the US Capitol, says Donald Trump is “wrong” when it comes to the joint US-Israeli war on Iran.

“Reckless war of choice.” US House of Representatives Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries criticised Donald Trump for what he called a failure to adequately prepare for the consequences of launching a war on Iran.

‘For 40 years, we’re protecting you’: US President Donald Trump criticises allies’ reluctance to commit forces to open the key waterway for Gulf oil exports.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attacks, which took place amid the escalating Israel-US war on Iran.

A prominent hotel in central Baghdad’s heavily fortified Green Zone was struck by a drone, amid reports that Iraqi air defences intercepted an attack over the United States Embassy.

The strike on Monday evening hit the top floor of Al-Rasheed Hotel, causing damage but no casualties, according to two Iraqi security officials cited by The Associated Press (AP) news agency.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Security sources told the Reuters news agency that two Katyusha rockets had been intercepted that evening near the US Embassy in the Green Zone, which houses diplomatic missions as well as international institutions and government offices.

Earlier Monday, the Iran-backed Kataib Hezbollah announced that Abu Ali Al-Askari, a prominent security official with the paramilitary group, had been killed, without giving details on the circumstances.

Kataib Hezbollah is one of the largest groups in the Popular Mobilisation Forces (PMF) operating in Iran, which was founded in 2014 to stop lightning advances by ISIL (ISIS).

On the same day, AP reported that six PMF fighters were killed in a strike on a checkpoint in western Iraq’s Anbar province, and two others were killed in a separate strike on the headquarters of a PMF brigade in the same area.

Two Iraqi security officials told AP that the Majnoon oilfield in Iraq’s southern Basra province was targeted by two drones. No casualties were reported, and it was not immediately clear if there was damage to the facilities.

Iraq’s oil industry has been severely impacted by the US and Israel’s war on Iran and Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil trading corridor.

Iraqi Minister of Oil Hayan Abdul-Ghani said in a video statement on Monday that a pipeline from the northern city of Kirkuk to Turkiye would be operational within a week, allowing the country to resume its oil exports, which have been interrupted by the ongoing war.

Also on Monday, air defences intercepted and shot down a drone near Erbil airport in the semi-autonomous Kurdish region of northern Iraq, according to security sources.

Offering another rationale for the US-Israeli war on Iran, Donald Trump claimed he ordered strikes to prevent a nuclear conflict that would have turned into World War III. He also said not even the “greatest experts” thought Iran would retaliate with attacks on Gulf states.

As the war US-Israeli war on Iran enters its third week, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has said that his country has shown it is ready to take the war “as far as necessary” and that the conflict must end in a way “that our enemies will never again consider repeating these attacks”.

Joint attacks by the United States and Israel have severely reduced Iran’s capacity to fire missiles and drones, experts say, but Iran retains enough capabilities to inflict significant damage.

“Iran’s ballistic missile capacity is functionally destroyed. Their navy assessed combat ineffective. Complete and total aerial dominance over Iran,” the White House said on Saturday. “Operation Epic Fury is yielding massive results,” it said in reference to the war launched by Israel and the US on February 28.

On Sunday, President Donald Trump said US forces had decimated Iran’s drone manufacturing capacity.

Still, on Monday afternoon, Qatar announced it had intercepted the latest in a series of missiles fired from Iran towards the country. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain also issued alerts. A missile landed on a car in Abu Dhabi, killing a person.

So are Iran’s missile capabilities severely reduced? And how is it still firing projectiles at its neighbours and Israel?

Is Iran firing fewer missiles now?

Indeed, the number of retaliatory missiles and drones that Iran has fired towards Gulf countries, Israel and other nations in the region has seen a steep decline since the start of the war.

In the first 24 hours of the conflict, Iran had fired 167 missiles (ballistic and cruise) and 541 drones at the United Arab Emirates, for instance. By contrast, on day 15 of the conflict, it had shot four missiles and six drones, according to a tally compiled by Al Jazeera based on the emirate’s Defence Ministry statements.

The barrage against Israel has also decreased, from nearly 100 projectiles over the first two days to a single-digit number in the past few days, according to Israel’s Institute for National Security Studies.

Last week, the Pentagon said missile launches were down 90 percent from the first day of fighting and drone attacks were down by 86 percent.

How big is Iran’s missile arsenal – and how much has it been hit?

Iran has the largest inventory of ballistic missiles in the region, the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence assessed in 2022. While there are no official accounts on how many missiles it has, Israeli intelligence reports suggest it counted around 3,000 missiles, a figure that dropped to 2,500 following the 12-day war last June.

Key to the US-Israel strategy has been hunting down Iran’s launchers. Each missile launch generates a signature, such as a large explosion, that can be picked up by a satellite and radar systems.

According to a senior Israeli military official cited by the Institute for the Study of the War, Israel has put up to 290 launchers out of service, out of an estimated 410 to 440 launchers.

But Iran is a vast country, and without boots on the ground, it will be hard to completely eliminate Iran’s capacity to shoot despite the US and Israel having nearly full control of the country’s airspace, said David Des Roches, an associate professor at the National Defense University in Washington, DC.

“It is not obvious to identify launchers,” Des Roches told Al Jazeera. “What we see are missiles that were put in hidden places or places not associated with the military before the war, when there was less observation”.

According to Des Roches, the slowdown in launches is due to Iranian forces having lost the capacity to launch volleys. As a result, Iran has been firing one or two missiles at a time towards civilian and commercial infrastructure, especially in Gulf countries, instead of aiming volleys at military targets. Iran insists that it is targeting only US interests in the region.

“Militarily speaking [Iran’s action] is not significant – this is what is called harassment fire to exhaust alert systems in nearby countries and scare people off,” Des Roches said.

What’s Iran’s strategy?

According to Hamidreza Azizi, an expert on Iran and visiting fellow with the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWB), Tehran’s central calculation is that the Gulf and Israel may run out of their defensive capabilities before Iran runs out of missiles.

“There might be some interest in making this a war of attrition,” he said, pointing at the lower, yet constant, number of weapons launched from Iran each day.

“Although the US and Israel have been successful in taking out some of the launchers and major missile bases, the Iranians have decentralised the missile bases and missile command and they have been increasingly relying on mobile launchers which makes it more difficult for the other side to detect and target,” Azizi said. “This is a race about time.”

And in that race, Iran believes it has a chance, say experts.

“It does not matter how many you launch as long as you maintain a credible threat,” Muhanad Seloom, an assistant professor in critical security studies at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, told Al Jazeera. “It takes one successful drone to shatter a sense of security.”

Iran has long experience in producing cheap yet effective drones. The Shahed 136 can be made quickly and in large numbers in relatively simple factories, and several of them can be fired at once, overwhelming defences. It also doesn’t need complex launchers that can be targeted in air strikes. With a speed of just 185km/h (115mph), Shaheds can be shot down by helicopters. Still, many have managed to get through US and Gulf air defence systems.

Just on Monday, a fire broke out near the UAE’s Dubai International Airport in a drone-related incident that temporarily disrupted flights; another drone attack caused a fire at the Fujairah industrial area, also in the UAE; air sirens sounded in central Israel due to a missile fired from Iran; and in the Strait of Hormuz – a key waterway through which 20 percent of global energy supplies are shipped – hundreds of vessels remain paralysed over fear of being struck despite few attacks on ships. Since the start of the war, a maritime tracker has reported 20 incidents related to vessels.

This, say experts, is part of Iran’s defensive doctrine of asymmetric warfare against militarily superior powers, such as the US and Israel. The weaker party, Iran in this case, turns to unconventional methods of warfare, wearing down the enemy by targeting key infrastructure to inflict economic pain.

Tehran has already pushed oil prices to higher than $100 a barrel and sent global markets into panic mode. The second-biggest exporter of natural gas, Qatar, continues to keep shut its production; Bahrain’s state oil company has declared force majeure on its shipments, and oil production from Iraq’s main southern ⁠oilfields has plunged 70 percent.

If Iran can keep raising global oil prices, “it will inflict equal or more damage to the US than American bombs in Iran,” said Vali Nasr, a professor of international affairs and Middle East studies at Johns Hopkins University.

Neighbourhoods in Beirut’s southern suburbs have been left in ruins by Israeli bombing attacks. Israel says it is targeting Hezbollah infrastructure but hundreds of thousands of people have been forcibly displaced.

Sometimes, journalists indulge in myths and delusions they claim to decry.

This grating inclination has been on almost giddy display in the still evolving aftermath of United States President Donald Trump’s rash decision to join Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in launching a war with Iran.

Like falling dominoes, a “narrative” gathered momentum among the America’s “progressive” commentariat, insisting that Trump’s order to go to war offended large swaths of the MAGA movement and set off a seismic split in his ardent base.

It is a silly myth and a seductive delusion.

Sure, a handful of familiar MAGA personalities have grumbled that another Middle East conflict betrays the “America First” pledge that helped propel Trump back to the White House.

Conservative commentator Megyn Kelly has questioned whether the US is drifting, yet again, into an endless war without purpose or meaning. Podcaster Joe Rogan has talked about the conflict’s disastrous, unintended consequences. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson has warned that the unprovoked attack could trigger chaos across an already volatile region.

Trump, of course, parried the backlash with trademark coarseness. He lashed out. He dismissed the naysayers. He mocked allies who briefly turned detractors.

Headlines blared that a domestic quarrel threatened to engulf his MAGA disciples in a “civil war.”

The idea that MAGA has fractured is fantasy. Disquiet is not rupture. Dissent is not rebellion.

The MAGA “movement” is not a conventional coalition held together by consensus around a coherent, considered set of principles or policies.

MAGA remains what it has always been: a political phenomenon built to burnish one man’s ego and narcissism. As long as that man is Trump, the “movement” bends to his designs and whims. It adjusts; and, inevitably, snaps back into loyal line.

That loyalty remains the movement’s signature force.

For nearly a decade, Trump has tested its limits. He has weathered scandals that would have devoured most politicians. Two impeachments. Criminal convictions. A litany of controversies, including his close and lengthy friendship with the architect of a worldwide sex trafficking ring, the notorious paedophile, Jeffrey Epstein.

Through it all, MAGA has, if anything, tightened its loving embrace of Trump.

The notion that a fraternal dispute over foreign policy would shatter the vice-like bond is absurd. That bond is emotion. It is visceral.

For his embittered supporters, Trump is the embodiment of grievance-fuelled defiance. He is a charismatic champion against enemies in Washington — the gilded establishment, the media, the global order who treats them with derision and contempt.

Within that parochial framework, Trump’s actions at home and abroad are filtered through the prism of fidelity. When Trump unleashes a war that he once opposed, his devout followers accept his shifting rationales — however obtuse or contradictory. They believe he sees threats others ignore. They believe he acts when others hesitate.

Indeed, polls confirm their steadfast confidence in Trump’s judgement and his enduring appeal.

The Republican Party has always harboured different instincts. Some supporters lean towards isolationism. Others favour aggressive displays of the America’s unparalleled power.

While there may be hints of unease among Republicans about the prospect of a long, costly war with Iran, that unease has not led, and likely will not lead, to a broad revolt anytime soon.

Trump’s standing within the Republican Party remains strong. His approval among Republican voters remains high. They trust him.

That trust trumps the simmering doubts raised by a small, albeit prominent, slice of MAGA fawning pundits and a few recalcitrant members of Congress.

Kelly knows it. Rogan knows it. Carlson knows it.

The trio understands that they operate inside a MAGA universe fashioned and controlled by Trump. Their popularity and influence depend on staying there. They know the defining rule of Trump’s gravitational pull: stray too far and you will be cast out.

Predictably, Carlson avoided escalation.

Instead, he declared his allegiance. He made plain that he still “loves” Trump. He reminded listeners that Trump had reshaped American politics.

Kelly and Rogan may question the risks and dangers of war, but neither would wage a sustained attack on the president. Neither would dare tell Trump’s loyalists to abandon him.

A fleeting disagreement over Trump’s reckless adventure in Iran will not translate into a lasting break.

Even the most high-profile MAGA hucksters recognise that confronting Trump invites retribution and disaster. Their audiences overlap. Their reach thrives in the same ideological ecosystem.

Picking an ultimately losing fight with the ecosystem’s vengeful anchor is rarely good business.

So, MAGA is, at the moment, experiencing a touch of turbulence. It will pass.

Which is why the constant search by establishment media for a dramatic MAGA schism keeps producing the standard result.

Nothing much changes.

Every time Trump sparks outrage, the same prediction appears. This time, the base will rebel. This time, the coalition will splinter.

This forecast is a tired ritual. It ignores the fundamental nature of the MAGA compact. That connection is not rooted in briefs or blueprints. It is a secular religion where the leader is never wrong.

Myopic scribes mistake a fracas for a collapse. They see tension and hope for a divorce. The believers are not preoccupied with the logistics of war or the mercurial logic of “America First”. They care about the man who gave them a voice.

Once the friction fades, the sceptics will retreat. They have nowhere else to go. The undeniable magnetism of Trump’s celebrity and command of MAGA reels most reluctant strays back.

To leave that agreeable orbit permanently is to vanish into irrelevance — a bleak fate for provocateurs who have forged lucrative careers amplifying Trump’s ignorance, intolerance, and fury.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.