Geopolitics

Iran's War Widens on Day Two: Succession Council Formed as Missiles Rain Across the Gulf

Tongzhi AI

— 6 min read

As Iran appoints a three-member transitional council to replace Ayatollah Khamenei, its retaliatory strikes expand across the Persian Gulf, hitting Dubai, Doha, and Manama for a second day. Nine are killed at the US consulate in Karachi. Trump threatens force "never seen before." The questions that should have been answered before the first bomb fell remain unanswered.

The second day of the US-Israeli war on Iran has produced two parallel realities: inside Iran, a regime decapitated but not collapsed scrambles to reconstitute authority; outside, the war's blast radius is expanding far beyond Iran's borders.

The Succession

Iran's constitutional machinery activated faster than many analysts expected. On Sunday morning, a three-member transitional council was announced: President Masoud Pezeshkian, Supreme Court Chief Justice Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, and Ayatollah Alireza Arafi, a member of the Guardian Council confirmed to the position by the Expediency Council. Under Article 111 of Iran's constitution, this body will govern until the 88-member Assembly of Experts selects a new supreme leader.

The speed is notable, but the composition raises questions. The council spans pragmatists and hardliners — Pezeshkian, a reformist president elected on a platform of engagement, sits alongside Mohseni-Ejei, a hardline judiciary chief with deep ties to the security apparatus. Arafi, though less well-known internationally, represents the Guardian Council's institutional weight.

Behind the formal structure, the real power broker appears to be Ali Larijani, secretary of the Supreme National Security Council. A former parliamentary speaker and nuclear negotiator, Larijani announced the transitional arrangements and warned "secessionist groups" against exploiting the crisis. His dual role — pragmatist who was mediating nuclear talks in Oman just days ago, and security hawk who the US sanctioned in January for directing a crackdown that rights groups say killed thousands — makes him the figure to watch.

The IRGC has reportedly named Ahmad Vahidi as its new commander-in-chief, according to TASS and IRGC-linked Telegram channels, though this has not been formally confirmed by Iranian state media. Whether the military or political wing of the regime dominates the transition will determine whether Iran escalates toward all-out war or seeks a negotiated off-ramp.

The Escalation

There is, so far, no off-ramp visible.

Iran's retaliation has expanded beyond Israel to strike US military assets across the Gulf. On Sunday morning, explosions were heard for a second consecutive day in Dubai, Doha, and Manama. The UAE's Ministry of Defence reported intercepting 137 missiles and 209 drones on Saturday alone. Fires and smoke reached Dubai's Palm Jumeirah and Burj al-Arab. At Abu Dhabi's airport, at least one person was killed and seven wounded. Dubai's airport — the world's busiest for international traffic — was damaged. Kuwait's airport was also hit.

Qatar reported 65 missiles and 12 drones fired at its territory on Saturday, with 16 people injured. An oil tanker was struck off Oman's coast after drones hit the port of Duqm. Jordan's defence systems intercepted missiles over Amman.

The IRGC claimed to have struck more than 20 US bases across the region and vowed the "most ferocious offensive operation in history." These claims cannot be independently verified. The Pentagon reported no US casualties and "minimal" damage — also unverified.

Israel, for its part, continued strikes inside Iran. The IDF announced it had dropped over 1,000 pieces of munitions in just over 24 hours. Waves of Iranian ballistic missiles continued hitting Israel, though in smaller salvos of roughly three missiles at a time rather than massive barrages. One missile evaded Israeli air defences on Saturday night, killing a foreign caregiver in a Tel Aviv residential area.

Trump responded on Truth Social: "IF THEY DO, WE WILL HIT THEM WITH A FORCE THAT HAS NEVER BEEN SEEN BEFORE!" Iran's parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, replied that Trump and Netanyahu had "crossed our red lines" and "will suffer the consequences."

The Weak Case for War

The stated justification for the strikes — eliminating "imminent threats" from Iran's nuclear and missile programmes — is under increasing scrutiny.

Oman's Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi told CBS on February 27, the day before the strikes, that Iran had agreed to cease stockpiling enrichable nuclear material: "If you cannot stockpile material that is enriched, then there is no way you can actually create a bomb. I think we have cracked that problem through these negotiations."

Trump had repeatedly claimed to have destroyed Iran's nuclear programme in June 2025 strikes, and the US military did not list nuclear sites among targets struck on February 28. His assertion that Iranian missiles could "soon" reach the American homeland is contradicted by a 2025 Defence Intelligence Agency assessment that Tehran lacked intercontinental ballistic missiles and might not develop them until 2035.

"President Trump did not make a strong case for an imminent threat posed by Iran that would justify the massive joint US-Israeli strikes," said Mona Yacoubian, director of the Middle East Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "His call for the Iranian people to prepare to take control underscores that the ambitions here are more akin to regime change."

The Global Fallout

The war's consequences are rippling outward.

Energy markets: The IRGC's warning that "no ship is allowed to pass the Strait of Hormuz" threatens roughly 20 percent of global oil and gas shipments. An oil tanker was struck off Oman. OPEC+ was already discussing production increases before the conflict erupted; the question now is whether any production increase can compensate for a potential Hormuz closure. Energy analysts have warned of potentially the most severe supply disruption since the 1990 Gulf War.

Global aviation: At least eight countries have closed their airspace. Thousands of flights have been disrupted. Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Kuwait airports have been damaged or shut down.

Regional contagion: Nine people were killed when protesters stormed the US consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. Protests erupted in Iraq, Indian-administered Kashmir, and across Shia communities worldwide. Iraq declared three days of mourning. A UN building was burned in Pakistan. The Pakistan-Afghanistan conflict — already an open war — risks being further destabilised by the regional chaos.

Diplomatic isolation: The UN Security Council held an emergency session. The EU urged "maximum restraint." The IAEA scheduled an extraordinary meeting on Iran for March 2. European allies have pointedly stressed they did not participate in the strikes. China and Russia, both of which maintain significant ties with Tehran, have not yet issued detailed public responses — though Moscow's state media coverage has been extensive. Notably, key regional powers — Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Egypt — have still not issued substantive public responses, suggesting intense private calculations are underway.

The Counter-View

Supporters of the strikes argue that the diplomatic track had genuinely exhausted itself — that Iran's negotiating concessions were tactical delays, that its proxy network remained a lethal threat, and that Khamenei's removal creates an opportunity for a less hostile Iranian state. They point to Iran's retaliatory strikes on Gulf capitals as evidence of the threat Tehran poses when cornered.

This argument has weight. Iran's proxy forces have killed Americans and Israelis. Its nuclear programme, whatever its exact status, was advancing. Three rounds of negotiations had ended without agreement. The IRGC's retaliatory strikes on civilian airports and Gulf capitals — damaging Dubai's airport, killing at least one person at Abu Dhabi's, and striking nations that had no role in the US-Israeli operation — lend credibility to the argument that Iran's military apparatus posed a genuine regional threat.

But the counter-argument is equally weighty: the Omani mediator said the deal was within reach. The stated casus belli — imminent nuclear and missile threats — is contradicted by US intelligence assessments. The operation was launched without apparent Congressional authorisation. And the widening of the conflict to Gulf states that host millions of civilians was a foreseeable, and now realised, consequence.

What Comes Next

Three things will determine whether this becomes a prolonged war or finds an exit:

First, the succession. If pragmatists like Larijani consolidate power, a ceasefire channel exists. If hardliners and the IRGC dominate, escalation is likely.

Second, Hormuz. If Iran actually enforces a shipping blockade, the economic pressure on all parties — including Iran's remaining trading partners — will be immense. So far, the threat has been announced but not fully tested.

Third, Washington's endgame. The Pentagon said the operation is "ongoing." Trump has described it as regime change. But regime change without a post-regime plan is the mistake the US made in Iraq in 2003, in Libya in 2011, and arguably in Afghanistan across two decades. Whether this administration has learned those lessons is the question that will define the next phase.

---

Sources

---

Published by Tongzhi AI editorial desk, 1 March 2026.

---

⚠️ AI-Generated Content Notice

This article was generated using artificial intelligence and may contain factual errors, incomplete analysis, or hallucinations. While sources are cited and editorial review has been applied, readers should independently verify claims before relying on this analysis for decision-making.

Read more