Iran War Begins: U.S.-Israeli Strikes, Khamenei’s Death, and a Region on the Edge

Dateline: Feb. 28, 2026 — What had lived for years as a shadow conflict—proxy wars, covert sabotage, “deterrence” punctuated by missiles—spilled into open confrontation Saturday after the United States and Israel launched a sweeping, coordinated assault on targets across Iran.

Iran struck back within hours, firing missiles and drones toward Israel and at facilities in multiple regional states hosting U.S. forces, as world leaders scrambled to keep the escalation from widening into a long war that could reshape the Middle East and rattle the global economy.

Iranian state media confirmed that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in the attack, an event without precedent in the Islamic Republic’s modern history and a move that signals this operation is not merely punitive.

President Donald Trump framed the strikes as an answer to “imminent threats” and repeatedly urged Iranians to “take over” their country, language that points toward regime-change ambitions and raises the stakes for what comes next.

Israel described the opening salvos as a “pre-emptive” attack intended to remove threats posed by Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, and Reuters reported the operation had been planned for months in coordination with Washington.

Explosions were reported in Tehran, while Israeli authorities moved quickly to close schools, restrict workplaces to essential sectors, and shut airspace.

The Pentagon and Israeli military have released limited target detail, but major outlets report that strikes hit air defenses, missile infrastructure, and leadership-linked sites—followed by Iranian retaliation aimed at Israel and U.S. assets across the region. The Pentagon said there were no U.S. deaths or injuries reported in the initial response.

Reuters reported Iranian state media confirmed Khamenei’s death, and that Iranian leadership figures were among those killed in the strikes. In a system built around the authority of a supreme leader, succession is existential.

Rival power centers (clerical authorities, the IRGC, security services, political factions) now face a crisis under bombardment, with every decision also serving as a test of legitimacy.

That dynamic compresses timelines: Iran’s next moves may be driven less by strategy than by the immediate need to prove control.

Iran’s retaliation reportedly extended beyond Israel to multiple countries where U.S. forces operate, intensifying fears that regional states could become unwilling participants. Britain’s Foreign Office told nationals in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE to shelter in place after reported missile attacks.

Then there’s the global tripwire: the Strait of Hormuz.

Reuters reported Iran warned the strait had been closed—an announcement that, if enforced even intermittently, could spike energy prices and force a military response to keep shipping lanes open.

Bloomberg reported ships hearing broadcasts purporting to be from the Iranian navy and described the strait as effectively shut in semi-official messaging, while noting the waterway handles roughly a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil trade.

Civilian toll and contested information: what we know, what we don’t

Iranian officials reported significant casualties, including a strike on a girls’ primary school in Minab.

Early figures vary: Reuters cited a local prosecutor saying 85 were killed, while the Financial Times reported at least 148 killed at the school and described wider casualties across multiple provinces. The U.S. military said it was examining reports of civilian harm.

As with any rapidly moving conflict, claims will outpace verification—especially when communications are disrupted and each side has incentives to frame events for international audiences. For now, the most reliable picture is the simplest one: a large-scale strike campaign is underway, and civilians are already paying a price.

Why now: diplomacy collapsing under “imminent threat” claims

The escalation comes against the backdrop of renewed U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations and long-running disputes over enrichment and missile capabilities. Reuters reported talks occurred as recently as Thursday, but U.S. officials said Iran was unwilling to give up the ability to enrich uranium; Tehran argues its program is for energy, while U.S. and Israeli leaders cite the risk of weaponization.

This also follows a prior, intense flare-up: Reuters described a 12-day air war in June in which the U.S. joined Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear installations—an episode that set the stage for today’s wider, more ambitious operation.

The global response: condemnation, emergency diplomacy, and legal questions

At the U.N., Russia and China criticized the strikes as diplomacy was still underway, and U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres called for an immediate cessation of hostilities, according to Reuters.

Russia’s Foreign Ministry went further, calling the attack “unprovoked” armed aggression and warning of humanitarian and even radiological risks, according to the AP.

In Washington, Reuters reported pushback from Democrats and some Republicans raising questions about congressional authorization if the campaign becomes prolonged.

What happens next: four near-term paths

1. Sustained air-and-missile exchanges with expanding target sets (command centers, infrastructure, ports), raising the chance of miscalculation.

2. Hormuz disruption

3. Proxy activation and asymmetric response (militias, cyber, sabotage) aimed at stretching U.S./Israeli defenses without inviting total destruction.

4. Internal Iranian instability as succession politics.

*Read after:* The question isn’t whether this spreads. It’s what form spreading takes: geography, economy, or politics.