The US and Israel’s military operation against Iran is rapidly changing the balance of power in the Middle East and beyond. Tehran is striking targets in Gulf countries, reports of attacks on NATO bases are emerging, and Donald Trump simultaneously talks about continuing the operation and allows for negotiations.
The conflict is already going beyond a local confrontation. The question now is not only how long the strikes will last, but also whether the crisis will escalate into a broader geopolitical confrontation with consequences for Europe and the global energy market.
Military phase: Trump’s statements and real limitations
US President Donald Trump stated that the operation against Iran could continue for several more weeks. According to him, the American military has the necessary resources to increase pressure, and he assesses the current results as successful.
At the same time, in an interview with American media, he hinted that dialogue is possible — if the Iranian side is ready for negotiations.
However, behind the tough rhetoric lies practical calculation. According to The Wall Street Journal, American air defense systems and precision munitions are being used intensively. Patriot and THAAD interceptor missiles are being expended faster than they are replenished. This creates a risk of reallocating stocks from other regions, including the European direction.
Thus, even with Europe’s formal distancing from the operation, the consequences are already being felt.
Strikes on NATO targets and Europe’s position
Reports of Iranian drone attacks on military targets in NATO countries have heightened tensions. However, the Alliance emphasizes that this is a campaign led by the US and Israel.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte explicitly stated that Alliance forces are not participating in offensive actions. The UK, Germany, and Spain also confirmed that they are not joining the strikes.
At the same time, European governments emphasize: if their military facilities are directly attacked, the right to self-defense will be exercised. This means that the space for expanding the conflict remains.
Negotiations or escalation: contradictory signals
Amid the hostilities, media reports emerged about the possible resumption of negotiations between the US and Iran on the nuclear program. However, Iranian officials publicly denied such a prospect.
The sides’ versions diverge. Washington speaks of readiness to talk. Tehran declares no intention to engage in dialogue.
Such dual communication creates uncertainty. On one hand — a demonstration of strength, on the other — a door left open for diplomacy. In such conditions, any sharp movement can change the scenario.
NAnews — Israel News | Nikk.Agency previously noted that such a model of pressure — military escalation plus rhetoric about negotiations — is often used to accelerate political decisions. But its effectiveness depends on the internal stability of the opposing side.
Energy shock: the main risk for Europe
One of the key factors remains energy. The Strait of Hormuz is a strategic route through which more than 20% of the world’s oil passes. Any disruptions in its operation are immediately reflected in prices.
The agency Reuters reports that OPEC+ has agreed on a moderate increase in production — about 206 thousand barrels per day. This is less than 0.2% of global supply and cannot compensate for serious disruptions.
Additional concern is caused by the situation in Qatar, which supplies about a fifth of the world’s liquefied natural gas. Any disruptions in LNG directly hit the European market, already sensitive to external shocks.
Gas prices in Europe react faster than political statements.
Risk of conflict globalization
Some experts warn: if China actively joins the confrontation, the conflict may enter a broader phase. So far, Beijing is limited to diplomatic activity but is closely monitoring developments.
If the escalation remains within the Middle Eastern theater of military operations, the most likely scenario will be a gradual decrease in intensity and a return to negotiations.
However, even a local conflict is already changing the global security architecture. The US has effectively opened a second major front amid the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine. This increases the burden on military resources and the system of international alliances.
What’s next
The coming weeks will be decisive. Three basic scenarios are possible:
— rapid de-escalation and return to the diplomatic track;
— prolonged confrontation with pressure on energy markets;
— expansion of the conflict with the involvement of additional powers.
For Europe, the key factor remains energy and the security of military facilities.
For Israel — the continuation of the active phase of confrontation with Iran.
For the US — the balance between demonstrating strength and the need to avoid uncontrolled escalation.
It is this strategic uncertainty that creates the feeling that the world has entered a period of systemic upheaval, where a local conflict can quickly acquire a global scale.