Vetted by NeuralPress's Multi-Agent Verifier for strict factual validity and event relevance. Our compliance engine cross-checks and filters search results to ensure zero false correlations or misleading content.
Impact of Regional Instability on Global Markets
Estimated economic impact and price surges due to regional conflict escalation.
Primary Sources
How the Iran War Confirmed, Contradicted, and Complicated U.S. Policy
Instead, the less expected happened: Iran has closed the strait to its adversaries and those aligned with them, imposed tolls on some (in Chinese renminbi), and allowed passage for a select group. Its de facto toll system has the intended effect of cascading economic pain and driving up the price of oil to over $100 a barrel. Meanwhile, Iran’s oil and other cargo is allowed transit, giving Tehran unprecedented control over the escalation and new, significant leverage in any negotiation. This has led to the Trump administration’s imposition of a not-yet-clarified “blockade” to raise the cost of the regime’s resistance to its demands at the negotiating table and of its intransigence in the strait.Another critical change is likely to be doctrinal. For four and a half decades, the Iranian regime’s modus operandihad been to push the envelope with adversaries while maintaining plausible deniability. This resulted in the regime developing capabilities aligned with this foundation of its doctrine, including the emphasis on the use of proxies and other hybrid capabilities. While the initial phase of Israel’s response following October 7 saw a continuation of that trend, this dynamic changed over 2024 when Iran began to overtly and directly target Israel. In the current war, the regime has increased the radius dramatically to target not only neighbors’ territories, but their critical and civilian infrastructure. This has reset the table. Iran will likely deprioritize deniability in the future, especially after the degradation of its proxies, and focus more on rebuilding its own defenses and asymmetric capabilities.What did U.S. experts get right?Crucially, the U.S. assumption that the Iranian regime would be resilient in the face of efforts to depose its senior leaders has been validated. Despite the shorthand of “the Ayatollah” as the center of gravity in the regime (in many ways, he was), the Islamic Republic has built a scaffolding of military, quasi-military, and civilian (both clerical and non-clerical) institutions designed to maintain its grip on power.This is why decapitating Iran’s top figures has not precipitated an immediate collapse, nor has it degraded the regime’s core function of preserving its monopoly on the use of force within its territory—even if it has severely weakened it—as the administration appears to have assumed it would. In fact, the assumption that a potential outcome of a “regime change” effort would be the emergence of one more closely...
Iran's Confrontation Strategy through the Dichotomy of Geography and ...
I n conflicts between states, the use of force is not the only factor shaping the course of a conflict. In fact, other strategic deterrent factors arise from the intersection of geography and politics, carrying significant weight in tipping the scales in favor of one side or the other. These factors include geographical location, time, planning mechanisms, decision-making processes, and implicit alliances. Non-military caveats mean that war is not merely a direct confrontation between military forces; rather, it is a challenge between political systems. As the great German military theorist Clausewitz stated, “War is the continuation of politics by other means.” In this context, Iran’s response to the joint U.S.-Israeli attack on February 28, 2026, is a prime example of a strategy that draws its strength from various factors, enabling it to withstand pressure. Additionally, Iranian decision-makers have a history of long-term resilience when dealing with adversaries, whether in times of peace or during disputes and conflicts. Tehran tends to employ a strategy of political and economic attrition against its opponents. Iran has responded to aggression with military action, targeting U.S. interests, Gulf Cooperation Council countries’ territory, and the Israeli heartland. This showcases the Iranian combat doctrine and conflict architecture, which focuses on strategies that confound adversaries and make prolonging the conflict costly and difficult. So, what has Iran done to withstand all this pressure? The Iranian decision-making circle Contrary to what some believe about Iran’s centralized decision-making process, Iran initially employs a strategic doctrine often referred to as “mosaic defense.” This doctrine involves distributing leadership roles to branches that can fight independently without central command and that have alternatives for every administrative position. Iran’s complex regime structure makes it impossible to cripple the regime by targeting the Supreme Leader or other prominent leaders, while maintaining communication networks between various commands and units. Second, since the revolution, Iran has proven that it is prepared for all scenarios, especially after the joint U.S.-Israeli attack in the twelve-day war in June 2025. Iran has demonstrated its readiness for a prolonged war that does not necessitate a swift resolution. It can exhaust its adversaries and transform the war into a political and economic burden for the opposing side. Thir...
Collection: Iran, Israel and the United States at War (2025-2026 ...
Collection of articles analyzing U.S. and Israel's war with Iran - strategic, security, regional implications; domestic and international law.
Iran war: What is happening on day 47 of the US-Iran conflict?
United States President Donald Trump has said that the war on Iran is "very close to over" as Israel and Lebanon held rare direct talks in Washington, DC amid continued Israeli attacks in Lebanon.
