US-Israel Launch Coordinated Airstrikes on Iran, Triggering Retaliatory Missile Attacks
The United States and Israel launched coordinated airstrikes against Iran on Saturday, targeting multiple military installations across the country in what both governments described as a pre-emptive operation. The attack drew immediate retaliatory missile strikes from Tehran against American military bases throughout the Gulf region, setting off a diplomatic scramble among world powers and raising fears of broader regional escalation.
Pre-emptive Strikes and Immediate Retaliation
Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz announced that "the State of Israel launched a pre-emptive attack against Iran to remove threats to the State of Israel." US President Donald Trump followed with a video statement confirming American forces had begun "major combat operations in Iran" to eliminate what he described as imminent threats from the Iranian regime, vowing to destroy Iran's missiles and missile industry. Loud explosions were reported across Tehran as the Israeli military emphasized it was specifically targeting military sites.
Iran's response came within hours through an operation named Truthful Promise 4. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps launched retaliatory strikes against American military installations across the Gulf, including:
- The US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain
- Military bases in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates
- Additional military sites in Israel
Qatar reported intercepting incoming missiles before they entered its airspace, while the UAE confirmed one death from missile shrapnel. Bahrain condemned the strikes as a violation of its sovereignty, and Qatar's Foreign Ministry denounced what it described as an Iranian ballistic missile attack, stating it "reserves the right to respond" in accordance with international law.
Regional and Global Security Measures
As tensions mounted, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had not been seen publicly for days, was reportedly moved to a secure location before the strikes began. Israel took immediate defensive measures by:
- Closing its airspace to civilian flights
- Activating nationwide civil defense protocols
- Instructing citizens to remain close to protected spaces
India issued advisories urging its nationals in both Israel and Iran to exercise "utmost caution," reflecting growing international concern about the expanding conflict.
A Multipolar Fault Line Emerges
What distinguishes this confrontation from previous US-Iran or Israel-Iran tensions is the extent to which it has activated competing global alignments and the remarkable speed with which this polarization has occurred. Russia immediately condemned the strikes, while China called for an immediate ceasefire while simultaneously issuing advisories to its citizens to leave Iran.
Both nations' public postures sit uneasily alongside their deepening ties with Tehran. Moscow and Beijing have recently held trilateral naval exercises with Iran and expanded defense cooperation—signals that, for many observers, point to a world where the Middle East is no longer simply a theater of US-led Western power projection but a contested arena of genuinely multipolar rivalry.
Professor Swaran Singh of Jawaharlal Nehru University's School of International Studies, who specializes in Arms Control & Disarmament and Conflict Resolution & Peace Studies, argues that the situation is considerably more complicated than the strikes alone suggest.
"The so-called pre-emptive strikes have not delivered expected outcomes for regime change," he explained. "This means strikes and counter-strikes will continue with impact on the global energy market and disrupted airlines that will impinge on the entire world."
He added that the Russia-China dimension gives this confrontation a dimension previous Middle East crises lacked. "Both have displayed closeness with Iran through recent trilateral naval exercises and defense contracts. This confrontation is complicated and will impact Trump's mid-term elections and his early April visit to Beijing."
Civilizational Dimensions and Diplomatic Calculations
One question already circulating in diplomatic and academic circles is whether Muslim-majority nations will frame the strikes as a civilizational assault—a renewal of Samuel Huntington's much-debated "clash of civilizations" thesis. Professor Singh remains cautious about this interpretation.
"That sentiment may be strengthened," he noted, "but Islamic nations are not likely to promote such a divide given their dependence on the US."
This calculus—caught between religious solidarity and strategic dependence on Washington—is precisely the bind many Gulf states now find themselves in. Several host American military bases that Iran has now explicitly targeted, yet none has publicly endorsed the strikes against Iran.
Immediate Concerns and Future Implications
The immediate concern is escalation management. Global oil markets, civilian aviation across the region, and the broader architecture of Gulf security have all been significantly disrupted. With Russia and China on one side of the diplomatic ledger and the US and Israel on the other, the space for neutral mediation has narrowed sharply.
Gulf states face perhaps the most uncomfortable position of all—caught between their security dependence on Washington and the immediate vulnerability that dependence has now created. On diplomatic options, Professor Singh noted that "technically Geneva talks mediated by Oman continue but no next meeting is scheduled."
Whether this remains a contained—if severe—military exchange, or hardens into a more durable multipolar confrontation with the Middle East as its central theater, may depend on whether that diplomatic channel can be revived before the next round of strikes makes it irrelevant. The coming days will reveal whether global powers can de-escalate tensions or whether this marks the beginning of a new, more dangerous phase in Middle Eastern geopolitics.
