War in Iran/Middle Est/Gulf and beyond
(Ebenezer Obadare – Council on Foreign Relations) As the war in Iran rumbles on, its diplomatic ripple effect is increasingly felt worldwide. This is partly due to the Iranian regime’s deliberate targeting of other states across the region in an effort to drag them into the conflict, and partly because of its blockade of the economically vital Strait of Hormuz—a conduit for an estimated twenty million barrels of crude oil and oil products daily. While the overall outcome of the conflict remains anyone’s guess, there is no question that it will leave Iran considerably weakened, thus jeopardizing its longstanding diplomatic, economic, religious, and military engagement in Africa. The reaction from African countries has varied in direct proportion to their perceived economic and political interest and the quality of their diplomatic relationship with the United States, Israel, and Iran, respectively. Significantly, African countries have refused to side with Iran, a stance that will no doubt come as a disappointment to the regime in Tehran, given its diplomatic and military initiatives in Africa in recent decades. Instead, many African countries have explicitly condemned Tehran’s attempt to internationalize the conflict. The overall cautious tone across the continent was set by the African Union, the umbrella body of all African states, which in an official statement called for “restraint, urgent de-escalation, and sustained dialogue” and urged “all concerned actors to prioritize diplomatic engagement.”. Even South Africa could only issue a muted condemnation (of the United States and Israel) by noting that “anticipatory self-defense is not permitted under international law.” Many might have expected the country to stand up for Tehran considering its robust ties with the Iranian regime dating back to the 1979 Islamic Revolution, that both are members of the anti-Western BRICS+ coalition, its outspokenness on the Israel-Hamas conflict on the side of the Palestinians, and the fact that currently there is no love lost between Pretoria and Washington. – Africa’s Silence on the Iran War Speaks Volumes | Council on Foreign Relations
(Daniel Byman – CSIS) Although the U.S. and Israeli war with Iran and the Iranian response dominate headlines, the concurrent war between Israel and Lebanon is producing almost as many casualties—over 1,000 Lebanese have died so far—and has led to the evacuation of parts of northern Israel, the deaths of several Israelis, and the displacement of over 1 million Lebanese in just two weeks. This war is a continuation of past attacks, with March representing a sharp escalation in their scope and scale. The latest round of conflict can be dated to when Hezbollah attacked Israel after Hamas’s October 7, 2023, strike. After months of limited back-and-forth, an all-out war broke out in 2024, which Israel won decisively. Although the two agreed to a ceasefire in November 2024, Israel carried out hundreds of attacks on Hezbollah positions and personnel since then. Things got much worse after Hezbollah struck Israel with rockets and drones shortly after Operation Epic Fury (Israel calls its operation “Rising Lion”) began. Since that attack, Israel has hit Lebanon hard, striking hundreds of sites including command centers, weapons storage areas, and military leaders and personnel, particularly from its elite Radwan forces. Israeli ground forces have also advanced several miles into Lebanon. – What Is Israel Trying to Accomplish in Lebanon?
(David Michel – CSIS) The economies of the Persian Gulf countries depend on oil and natural gas. Their populations depend on desalinated water. Nature endows the Arabian Peninsula with scant freshwater resources. Consequently, all of the six Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations lining the Gulf’s southern shores critically rely on desalination plants drawing seawater from the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea. The war on Iran that began on February 28 puts these essential water systems at risk. Desalination facilities in Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) suffered indirect damage from missile and drone strikes early in the conflict. Subsequently, plants in Bahrain and Iran have reportedly been intentionally attacked. Deliberate targeting of desalination infrastructure would represent a significant conflict escalation, potentially threatening vital water supplies for millions of people across the region. – Could Iran Disrupt the Gulf Countries’ Desalinated Water Supplies?
(Emily Harding – CSIS) The conflict in the Gulf has now claimed several new victims: data centers. This marks a sea change in warfare and will force tech companies to reevaluate their posture around national defense. Defending them effectively means a new policy by the U.S. government—one that creates deterrence not just to protect life and health, but also data. In the early days of this conflict in the Gulf, Iran made a strategic decision: It struck two AWS data centers in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and one more in Bahrain. Damage was moderate, but disruption was extensive, affecting everything from banking to consumer services. Then, on March 11, a strike hit a data center linked to Bank Sepah in Tehran that contained salary data for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the Iranian army. That strike disrupted salary payments to Iranian military elements, and, according to the Jerusalem Post, online banking is at least temporarily inoperable. – Data Is Now the Front Line of Warfare
(Atlantic Council) Call it a crude awakening. On Thursday morning, the price of Brent crude shot past $115 per barrel, up roughly 50 percent in the past month. This latest surge followed an Israeli strike on Iran’s South Pars gas field and an Iranian attack on a major Qatari gas hub, which raised fears that attacks would spread to other critical energy infrastructure in the region. All told it’s been a rollercoaster week for financial and energy markets, as Iran has maintained its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz and the conflict in the region has spread and shown no signs of ending. – Why the Iran war energy shock is different – Atlantic Council
(The Soufan Center) There are myriad assumptions by the Trump administration that have proven faulty thus far and have contributed to the devastation wrought by this conflict to date. In addition to misplaced assumptions, Washington’s strategic communications have hampered the military campaign. Tehran recognizes that it will not be able to defeat the U.S. and Israel in a conventional conflict, but its approach will only allow for a Pyrrhic victory for Iran’s enemies. A deeply damaged yet surviving hardcore of the regime could also seek to race to develop a nuclear bomb, seeing it as the only potential safeguard from future attacks. – Misplaced Assumptions Have Plagued U.S. War Efforts Against Iran – The Soufan Center
(The Soufan Center) Should the Houthis in Yemen enter the war, they could serve as a force multiplier for Tehran by further depleting U.S. and Israeli air and missile defenses and diverting combat missions from Iran to sites in Yemen. The Houthis would likely target oil tankers in the Red Sea to help Tehran achieve a tipping point in its battle with the U.S. and Israel, further damaging the global economy. The Houthis would likely revive their attacks on Saudi Arabia’s energy and infrastructure targets if the Kingdom joins the U.S. and Israeli strike campaign on Iran. To date, the Houthis have been deterred from joining Tehran’s defense effort by concerns that the U.S. or Israel might destroy the key port of Hodeidah or other major facilities, and by the difficulty of obtaining weapons resupply from Tehran. – Possible Implications if the Houthis Enter the War – The Soufan Center
(Frederick Kempe – Atlantic Council) What frustrates senior Gulf officials, as Iran aims missiles and drones at their citizens and countries, is that too many in Washington are making the war a matter of US domestic politics and President Donald Trump. For them, what’s at stake is whether the Middle East moves in a uniquely positive direction or reverts to a more familiar, uglier one. Over the past two weeks, I have spoken with a number of Gulf officials to better understand how leaders in the region view this ongoing war. The conversations have been strikingly consistent. For many of them, this conflict was not a matter of if, but when. One senior Gulf official told me that his country has long known its greatest danger lies in Iran and not in Israel—a reality made obvious in recent days. The war’s inevitability was not due to any one factor, the officials told me. Rather, it was a cumulative consequence of a revolutionary regime that for nearly half a century built its power through murderous proxies, deadly missiles, nuclear aspirations, and relentless intimidation. Another senior Gulf official told me that his country had long argued to US negotiators from Democratic administrations that they were wrong to think that containing Iran’s nuclear capabilities was sufficient, as that failed to address the missiles and proxies that posed threats to its neighbors. In the telling of Gulf officials, the region has been living in a form of shadow war for years. Proxy conflicts, cyberattacks, and military strikes on energy infrastructure were part of a sustained campaign designed by Iran to test and erode the Gulf’s security architecture. Look at Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and increasingly Riyadh. They reflect a degree of religious tolerance, political moderation, and economic modernization that contrasts sharply with Iran’s theocracy. – Now that the Iran war is here, the US must complete its mission – Atlantic Council
Democracy
(Joshua Kurlantzick – Council on Foreign Relations) The global monitor of rights and democracy, Freedom House, today released its annual report, Freedom in the World 2026. Freedom House has long noted that global freedom has been declining, warning in earlier reports that it had been falling for 15, 16, 17 years, etc. But this version of Freedom in the World was the starkest yet about the global collapse of democracy and the rising power and collaboration of autocratic states which are working together, no longer just in ad hoc ways, to undermine democracy around the world. The Freedom House report was, overall, appropriately depressing. It found: “Global freedom declined for the 20th consecutive year in 2025. A total of 54 countries experienced deterioration in their political rights and civil liberties during the year, while only 35 countries registered improvements.” It added that the United States was one of the countries rated “free” that experienced the biggest declines in freedom last year. The only three countries who became freer in 2025, according to the report, were tiny Fiji and Malawi, as well as Bolivia. – Freedom House’s Annual Report Shows the Dire State of Democracy Worldwide | Council on Foreign Relations
Operation Iraqi Freedom
(Council on Foreign Relations) Twenty-three years ago tonight, President George W. Bush announced to the nation in a five-minute televised address that the United States had begun “military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people, and to defend the world from grave danger.” The U.S.-led forces in Operation Iraqi Freedom quickly toppled the government of Saddam Hussein. On May 1, Bush stood on the flight deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln in front of a banner that read “Mission Accomplished” and declared the end of major combat operations. The United States quickly discovered, however, that military success did not equal political victory. Inspectors found no evidence of the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that had been the reason for the war. Efforts to stop a brutal insurgency led to an eight-year-long occupation that left roughly 4,500 U.S. troops, more than 300 other coalition forces, and tens of thousands of Iraqis dead. The cost of the war and the occupation totaled $3 trillion. The public backlash against the war has reverberated through American politics ever since. A survey that CFR conducted with members of the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations ranked the invasion of Iraq as the worst decision in the history of U.S. foreign policy. – Remembering Operation Iraqi Freedom | Council on Foreign Relations
Women
(Noël James – Council on Foreign Relations) Created by CFR’s Women and Foreign Policy program, the Women’s Power Index ranks 193 UN member states on their progress toward gender parity in political participation. It analyzes the proportion of women who serve as heads of state or government, in cabinets, in national legislatures, as candidates for national legislatures, and in local government bodies, and visualizes the gender gap in political representation. Scroll down below the table to view a list of current female heads of state or government, trendline of women’s representation in 193 countries, learn why women’s political representation matters, find additional resources on women’s political participation, and read the methodology. – Women’s Power Index | Council on Foreign Relations
