Supreme Leader – The second round of the US–Israel offensive against Iran began in the early hours of February 28, following weeks of a massive build-up of American firepower in the Middle East. Much like the events preceding the 12-day conflict in June 2025, this time, too, US–Iran talks had reached an advanced stage – the two countries were apparently preparing to move towards parallel technical deliberations on enriched uranium and inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
US–Israel forces carried out coordinated aerial strikes on several targets across Iranian cities, including the complex housing the Supreme Leader, government ministries, and the Atomic Energy Organisation in Tehran. Supreme Leader Imam Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several top officials, including IRGC chief, major general Mohammad Pakpour, and defence council secretary Ali Shamkhani, are reported to have been killed in the attacks.
Advertisement Iran had repeatedly warned of swift retaliation during the build-up to the conflict. It launched a massive counter-offensive within hours, firing a barrage of missiles into Israeli cities, including Tel Aviv and the Mediterranean port city of Haifa, as well as at US bases and facilities across the Gulf region.
The Iranian regime has vowed to “avenge the martyrdom” of the Supreme Leader and has continued with successive waves of aerial attacks into Sunday, while US–Israeli forces remain engaged in ongoing military operations. All this invites questions.
Did the US and Israel cross a red line by targeting the Supreme Leader without being prepared for the fallout? Are they ready for a long and potentially destabilising war in an already volatile Middle East? Both the US and Israel have framed the offensive in terms that suggest regime change as an objective. They contend that such an outcome would allow the Iranian people the “freedom” to choose a government more aligned with the West. However, developments suggest that the Islamic Republic has moved quickly to ensure continuity.
Iran has initiated the constitutional process under which the Assembly of Experts will appoint a new Supreme Leader. In the interim, as mandated by the constitution, a council consisting of the President, the Head of the Judiciary, and a jurist from the Guardian Council—selected by the Expediency Discernment Council—has assumed the duties of the Supreme Leader.
Advertisement The Iranian regime had been speaking of a succession plan since the 12-day war, and it appears that these preparations have now been put into effect. Rather than weakening the regime, the killings may instead unite a population that had, until recently, been engaged in significant street protests over economic conditions and political repression. So far, the Iranian regime has demonstrated considerable resilience, absorbing the loss of top commanders while continuing to mount a substantial counter-offensive across multiple theatres, including the maritime domain.
Iranian aerial attacks have been intercepted or have struck targets associated with the US across Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Loud explosions caused by interceptions or direct hits have been reported in major cities, including Dubai, Doha, Manama, and Erbil.
The Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the largest US military base in the region, and the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Manama have reportedly been targeted multiple times in recent days. Iran’s counter-offensive against US bases in the Persian Gulf countries — except Oman — has expectedly drawn strong condemnation from these states.
Their air, land, and sea-based assets form the backbone of US military deployment in the region, and, in return, they rely heavily on American security guarantees. On their own, these states are unlikely to offer significantly greater support for the US–Israel offensive against Iran. However, following Israeli strikes on Hamas-linked targets in Doha last September, confidence in US protection may not be as strong as before.
It is possible that Iran is seeking to pressure Gulf states into deterring further US–Israel escalation. Tehran retains the capacity to increase pressure by threatening to disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz or by expanding attacks in the Red Sea and beyond.
Iraqi resistance groups have already claimed attacks on US targets, while public demonstrations against US embassies and consulates could generate another wave of anti-American sentiment across the region. In the coming days, the US and Israel will have to decide whether they are prepared for a prolonged conflict or if they will seek an off-ramp to de-escalate.
The situation also carries significant implications for South Asia. Further escalation in the Middle East could lead to a new round of sanctions against Iran and disrupt critical trade and energy supply routes.
India, in particular, has much at stake. A large Indian diaspora in the Gulf could be caught in the crossfire, and many could be forced to leave at short notice. India also has a strong interest in the stability and prosperity of Iran, an important regional partner.
Moreover, any reckless targeting of remaining nuclear sites in Iran could pose risks of radioactive contamination across the region, potentially affecting neighbouring countries, including India. At a time of rising tensions, there is a pressing need for responsible nations to support diplomatic efforts, regardless of their concerns about Iran’s nuclear and missile programmes. The alternative — a prolonged and expanding conflict in the Middle East — would carry consequences far beyond the region.
Gupta, a security analyst and former director general of police, is author of Glocal Terror in South Asia, Tracing the Roots in Geopolitics and the Tragedy of Afghanistan.