Irans

The countries of the Persian Gulf have adopted an unexpected civil protection measure against Iran’s attacks: teleworking

by

When an employee in Riyadh receives an email from his company telling him not to come to the office the next day, the most common reason was usually a sandstorm, construction work, or a holiday. In recent weeks, the reason has been something else: the possibility that its offices, probably located in a downtown financial district, could become Iranian missile target. In the Persian Gulf, teleworking has ceased to be a post-pandemic convenience and has become a civil protection tool in the midst of a geopolitical crisis that has been repeated in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Bahrain since the start of the armed conflict between the US, Israel and Iran. Riyadh: the most visible offices, the first to be emptied. According to published Reutersseveral Western and Saudi companies in Riyadh this week expanded their teleworking recommendations via email or text message sent to their employees. The notices focused on employees working in the King Abdullah financial district, Faisaliah Tower, Business Gate and Laysen Valley, areas where major US banks, technology companies such as Microsoft and Apple, and the Saudi sovereign wealth fund itself are based. The arguments for adopting this measure were not unfounded. Iran threatened to attack American interests in the region in retaliation and, in fact, attacked several Amazon data centers in United Arab Emirates. The order to telework does not mean that this simple measure will keep the civilian population safe, but it does distance them from the international offices occupied by American companies. The Arab Emirates were the first to adopt teleworking. The United Arab Emirates were, in fact, the first in ordering teleworking for its employees, immediately after Iran’s first attacks. According to published the local newspaper Khaleej Times, The Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratization asked private companies to adopt teleworking as a precautionary measure, keeping only workers whose physical presence was essential in their jobs. In those first attacks, four people were injured by debris from intercepted drones that fell on residential buildings, and damage was reported to the dubai international airportthe Burj Al Arab and the Palm Jumeirah. Teleworking recommended, not mandatory. The authorities of other countries in the region, such as Bahrain, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, also followed in the footsteps of the United Arab Emirates and recommended private companies adopt teleworking and restrictions on influx to offices due to the risk of Iranian missile attacks. Qatar, also punished for reprisals against US interests during the conflict, was another of the countries that activated teleworking protocols for its officials. However, something that all of them have in common is that none of them consider themselves as an obligation to teleworkbut rather companies are recommended to adopt teleworking, leaving the risk assessment to their discretion and that of local authorities. The Government of Dubai Media Office confirmed that the emirate’s private sector continued operating normally, with most business activities uninterrupted despite the risk of attacks. A region that learns to work under pressure. Although these countries are not officially at war with Iran, they are involved and targeted in Iranian attacks in retaliation against US and Israeli companies in the area. In this context, many fear that any escalation would lead Iran to attack critical infrastructure in the region more forcefully, which explains the caution of companies even after the announcement of the ceasefire reached in extremis during the early morning. trump qualified the pact of “total and complete victory.” But as negotiators work in Islamabad to turn that provisional ceasefire into a lasting agreement, Gulf companies continue to watch the calendar with one eye on the news and another on their security protocols to protect their employees. In Xataka | Working from anywhere was the dream of teleworking: not notifying those location changes can get you fired Image | Unsplash (Kate Trysh, Microsoft Copilot)

Who is stealing Iran’s rain?

by

In 1947, some funded experiments by the US army managed to cause artificial rainfall for the first time in history. Today, more than 50 countries have tried similar techniques. And in some regions of the world, modifying the sky is no longer just a scientific question, but a strategic tool with implications much deeper than it seems. The origin of a suspicion. The simple idea that one nation is “stealing” rain from another seems like fertile ground for science fiction. In the Middle East, however, it is not born in this warbut in a mix of extreme droughts, political tensions and poorly understood technology. It all started when in 2018, in the midst of the water crisis, an Iranian high command accused neighboring countries (including the Emirates) to prevent clouds from dumping on Iran. The hypothesis fit well in a context of regional rivalry and climate despair. And although science never supported such an idea, the concept caught on because it offered a simple explanation to a complex problem. Since then, the suspicion has evolved from an isolated comment to a recurring narrative. The war of the clouds. The technical basis for this accusation is cloud seedinga real practice that consists of introducing particles to encourage rain. Emirates has turned it into a almost strategic policywith million-dollar investments, pilots on permanent alert and almost military protocols. Iran also uses it, but with questionable results. The problem is that this technology, already difficult to measure, has become perfect fuel for theories of “atmospheric theft.” And so, what began as an experimental technique has led to a geopolitical narrative where clouds are perceived as contested resources. Clouds don’t steal (although that doesn’t matter). The experts are clear: clouds are ephemeral systems that last for hours and move constantly, which makes it practically impossible that one country deliberately “steals” rain from another. Furthermore, not even is proven that planting significantly increases rainfall. But the problem is not physics, but the perception. In an environment of extreme drought, viral images Different skies between neighboring countries or intense rains after planting operations fuel suspicion. And that suspicion, although scientifically weak, has enormous political power. Hence the images that we are seeing these days with the serious floods in the United Arab Emirates have paradoxically served as fuel for accusations on the other side. Looking for a culprit. The narrative of “rain theft” has grown at the same rate as the Iranian water crisis. With overexploited aquifers, almost empty reservoirs, disappearing lakes and agriculture that consumes most of the water, the country faces an unsustainable structural situation. Precipitation has fallen to historic lows. Cities are close to water collapse. And in that context, pointing out external actors serves to divert attention from decades of mismanagement, overexploitation and failed political decisions. The rain does not disappear because someone steals it, but because the system that was supposed to manage it no longer works. Emirates, from water power to military actor. And while Iran seeks explanations, the Emirates has bet to control their water vulnerability with money, technology and strategy. Cloud seeding is just one piece of a model that also includes mass desalination and planning in the long term. But now the context has changed dangerously. Emirates is starting to move towards a more direct involvement in the conflict with Iran. In fact, it is closing Iranian assets, putting economic pressure on it and valuing his entry into the war. And in this new scenario, that old accusation, that of stealing rain, can become one more element of political and narrative friction. From conspiracy to escalation. If you also want, the dangerous thing is not if the accusation is truebut rather what allows justifying. In a region where energy, water and security are intertwined, turning climate into a narrative weapon opens a dangerous door. From that perspective, tensions are no longer limited to missiles or drones, but extend to the invisible terrain of natural resources. And as the Emirates and other Gulf countries come closer to warany narrative that reinforces the idea of ​​aggression (even if it is climatic) can escalate the conflict beyond the military. An uncomfortable answer. So, if the question is whether Iran and the Emirates are stealing the rainthe real answer is much more disturbing than any conspiracy theory. Because it’s not that someone is deflecting the clouds with fantastic power, it’s that the climate system, the overexploitation of resources and human pressure are reducing availability of water throughout the region. Worse still, since even when tries to “make” rainmany times there is not enough humidity to do so. And the thing is that, deep down, the real war is not for who controls the cloudsbut about how to survive in an environment where there is less and less water to distribute. Image | USN In Xataka | A dangerous countdown ends in four days in Iran. So everyone is looking at the same place: Ukraine and the secret of its energy shield In Xataka | Iran has led the world to desperately search for energy sources. So China has made an irrefutable proposal to Taiwan

We have been avoiding the definitive energy crisis for months. Iran’s missile at Qatar’s largest gas plant threatens to detonate it

by

We had been holding our breath for weeks, assuming the logistical tension in the Strait of Hormuz like the new normal. However, the war has crossed an irreversible red line. We have gone from a trade blockade to the physical destruction of the world’s energy engine, and the consequences are already being felt in the global economy. The impact has been immediate. The price of natural gas in Europe (the TTF reference contract) has shot up 35% in a matter of hours, resurrecting the worst ghosts of the Ukrainian crisis of 2022. The magnitude of the disaster is such that Susan Sakmar, a professor at the University of Houston, warns in Bloomberg that this attack could be “a turning point for the LNG sector, similar to the attack against Nord Stream or perhaps even worse”, as it is a sudden interruption with no signs of a short-term solution. The chronological climb. To understand how we got here we have to look at the chain of events of the last 48 hours. The original trigger, as revealed The Wall Street Journalwas an attack by Israel against the South Pars field, the jewel in the crown of the Iranian energy industry, with the aim of suffocating the sources of financing for the Revolutionary Guard. And it is not just any objective. The analyst Joaquín Coronado emphasizes that South Paris (shared with Qatar, where it is called North Dome) is the largest natural gas field in the world, hosting 10% of global reserves. 70% of Iranian domestic consumption gas comes from there and generates 80% of the Qatari State’s income. A withering response from Tehran. As pointed out Financial TimesIran launched ballistic missiles against the giant Ras Laffan industrial complex in Qatar, the largest liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility in the world and home to key infrastructure such as Shell’s Pearl GTL plant. State-owned company QatarEnergy confirmed “extensive damage” and fires at its facilities. Panic spread throughout the Persian Gulf. According to Reutersthe Iranian Revolutionary Guard issued public evacuation orders, declaring vital energy facilities in Saudi Arabia (such as the Samref refinery and the Jubail complex), the United Arab Emirates (the Al Hosn gas field) and Qatar as “legitimate targets.” Shortly afterward, Riyadh intercepted missiles aimed at the Saudi capital. The market has felt the blow. Oil prices have gone crazy. As detailed oil price, a barrel of Brent surpassing the barrier of 110-113 dollars, which represents an increase of almost 60% in this month of March. However, the real problem goes beyond the daily price. Martin Senior, of Argus Media, warns of a “new level of impact”. It is no longer just about the logistical closure of the Strait of Hormuz (through which 20% of the world’s oil passes); The problem is that the time to repair these destroyed facilities could last much longer than the war itself. And the worst omens already have figures. As has revealed exclusively in Reuters CEO of QatarEnergy, the Iranian attack has knocked out 17% of the country’s LNG capacity for a period that could last up to five years. The domino effect. This situation is taking third countries on their way. As explained CrownedIraq has suddenly lost 3,100 megawatts of electricity due to the Iranian supply cut, while Türkiye will be forced to compete fiercely for emergency LNG shipments. In Europe, the panic is evident: the bulletin Europe Express of the Financial Times reveals that war has blown up the EU leaders’ summit in Brussels, where debate on how to improve competitiveness has been completely overshadowed by fear of energy bills and domestic pressure on the emissions trading system. Geopolitics to the limit. Diplomacy appears broken and America’s allies are losing patience. According to the Wall Street JournalArab governments are “furious” because they feel that the US and Israel strategy has put a target on their backs. For its part, Al Jazeera includes the statements of the Saudi Foreign MinisterPrince Faisal bin Farhan, who has warned Iran that the Gulf’s patience “is not unlimited” and they reserve the right to take military action. Qatar, for its part, has expelled the Iranian diplomats, giving them 24 hours to leave the country. In the midst of this chaos, Washington’s role is erratic. President Donald Trump went to social media to deny prior knowledge of the Israeli attack on South Paris. However, how to collect WSJ, Trump issued an ultimatum to Tehran: if it attacks Qatar again, the US will “massively blow up the entire” Iranian oilfield. Faced with rising prices, the White House is seeking desperate measures. The column of Javier Blas in Bloomberg reveals a controversial plan of the US Treasury: to intervene directly in the financial markets by betting on the downside (shorting) in oil futures to artificially make gasoline cheaper before the elections. An idea that experts such as the CEO of CME Group describe as a “biblical disaster” that would destroy confidence in the free market. The peripheral context. To get the full picture, you have to look beyond the explosions. Verisk Maplecroft Analyst warn in Reuters that the greatest danger right now is that the attacks will extend to Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline or to Red Sea ports. These were the only viable alternative routes to avoid the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, through which 20% of the world’s oil normally transits. In an attempt to cushion the blow domestically, the Trump administration has temporarily suspended the century-old Jones Act (Jones Act) for 60 days, allowing foreign-flagged ships to transport oil and gas between US ports to reduce costs. The dead end. The panorama is bleak. As they reflect on Five Daysthe apparent lightness with which this conflict has developed has dragged us into a dead end. Iran has shown that it does not need to win a conventional war; It is enough for him to set the energetic heart of the planet on fire. Even if a ceasefire were signed tomorrow and ships sailed freely through the Strait of … Read more

the only tools this expat needs to hunt down Iran’s ghost tankers

by

From the 47th floor of his Singapore apartment building, Remy Osman, a British expat who works in the beverage industry, has a front-row seat to one of the world’s biggest geopolitical clashes. Armed with binoculars, a wide-angle camera and live tracking applications, Osman watches as a 333-meter-long supertanker moves at a snail’s pace along one of the busiest shipping routes on the planet. The scene contains a brutal irony: as detailed Financial Timesthat ship’s cargo has almost doubled in value since it set sail just two weeks ago, coinciding with Brent crude oil reached 120 dollars per barrel in the wake of the war between the United States, Israel and Iran. From his balcony, Osman hunts the ships of the so-called “shadow fleet”, sanctioned oil tankers that operate outside the law, but in broad daylight. The ship that caught Osman’s attention is the Hugean 18-year-old oil tanker. According to the sanctions list records of the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)it is an Iranian-flagged ship operated by the National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) and heavily monitored since 2018. Although the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz began at the end of February with attacks by the United States and Israel, the Huge It has been one of the few large crude oil cargo ships (VLCC) that managed to get out of that mousetrap. From his privileged vantage point, Osman has identified an unmistakable pattern: the Iranian oil tankers sail towards the east sunken in the water, revealing that they are loaded to the brim, and a week later they return in the opposite direction floating much higher, with their load considerably lighter. The most surprising thing is the nerve with which they operate in the midst of the current crisis. Ships that were previously hidden now display their names and flags as if to say: “We have as much right to navigate these waters as anyone else,” Osman himself said. to the Finance Times. This impunity has reached the point that almost two-thirds of the NITC fleet have started transmitting data accurate in their Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) after seven years of manipulation and concealment. Tehran’s lifeline The impact of this ghost fleet parading in front of Osman’s window is titanic. As the world suffers “the largest supply disruption in history” due to the closure of Hormuz, Iran continues to export its crude oilsurpassing the barrier of 2 million barrels per day. The millions of barrels that Osman sees disappearing on the horizon have an overwhelmingly single destination: China. The Asian giant absorbs around 90% of Iran’s oil exports. The data tracked corroborate this massive escapeplacing the “Iran-China” route in first place in dark operations, moving more than 1.6 million barrels per day. While Iran profits, the rest of the planet trembles. With some 20 million barrels a day taken off the formal board due to the physical blockade of Hormuz, the scenario of a barrel at $200 is already a real possibility. The global threat is proportional to the size of this illicit network: according to Fortunethe dark fleet is estimated at about 1,100 vessels, representing between 17% and 18% of all liquid cargo tankers in the world. The machinery to outwit the Western powers is a marvel of evasive engineering that occurs a few kilometers from Osman’s house. As explained Financial Timestankers do not sail directly from Iran to Chinese ports, but instead perform ship-to-ship (Ship-to-Ship) transfers on the high seas. The main scenario for this transfer is the Eastern Outer Port Limits, in Malaysian waters, an area with little supervision. On a single day last January, satellite images confirmed the presence of about 60 of these ships anchored there, operating with total impunity. To achieve this level of invisibility, they exploit legal loopholes in the sea. As detailed Fortune, The international maritime system is based on voluntary compliance: ships simply turn off their radio transponders, spoof their locations, or change their identities by scratching their registration numbers. In addition, they rely on “flags of convenience.” According to the statistics of Tanker TrackersIn addition to Iran and Russia, dark ships often fly flags of countries such as Panama, Cameroon or Sierra Leone. The final link in this chain is found in Asia. The report of Kharon reveals that the final buyers They are not the large state oil companies, but the so-called refineries teapot. These small, independent refiners absorb 90% of Iranian exports and give Beijing “plausible deniability” in the international community, even though these private companies are deeply connected to the Chinese state through joint ventures and front-line networks in Hong Kong. Attempts to stop this illicit transfer have been few and often frustrating. Although Malaysian authorities recently seized crude oil worth almost $130 million from two suspicious tankers, the outcome was laughable: after paying bail of just $75,000, the ships were released. The next day, Osman looked out on his balcony again and there was one of them, the Celebratebrowsing again fully loaded. The paradox in the shadows Still, the war has brought some complications. According to Lloyd’s Listthe escalation of war forced at least six ghost tankers that were sailing empty towards the Persian Gulf to turn around (the so-called U-turns) and abort its operations. But the network is resilient: as experts point out, the shadow fleet is designed precisely to operate under disruption. The great irony is that, while those sanctioned find cracks to navigate, the legal actors are desperate. The blockade has forced Saudi Arabia to use its oil pipeline through the desert against the clock to divert millions of barrels to Yanbuin the Red Sea, where an emergency armada of supertankers is queuing up in an agonizing attempt to evacuate legal crude oil and prevent economic collapse. How to conclude Fortune, The dark fleet did not arise because the maritime system is broken, but because it was always voluntary. Today, sanctions have pushed countries like Iran to build a highly effective parallel system. While the formal world looks for alternative … Read more

Iran’s Achilles heel is a tiny island located 25 km from its coast. The question is whether the US will dare to attack it

by

Until practically the day before yesterday Kharg island It was unknown to the vast majority of Europeans. Normal. To begin with, because it is thousands of kilometers from the heart of the EU, in the Persian Gulf, about 25 kilometers from the Iranian coast. It’s not particularly big either. It measures about eight kilometers long and 4.5 km wide. Despite all that, Kharg is perhaps the point that attracts the most attention. is hoarding (from Europe, but also the United States, China and Russia) in the convulsive geopolitical board with which March has started. The reason: the island is the key link of the Iranian oil sector. In a place in the gulf… Kharg Island is not exactly big. It measures 22 km2. What it does not have in surface area, however, it makes up for with its location. Located just 25 km from the Iranian continental coast and a few hundred kilometers from Strait of Hormuzis a strategic point for the global oil industry. The reason: that tiny island channels almost all of the crude oil exported by Iran. And those are big words if we take into account that, according to OPEC calculations, it is estimated that the Islamic Republic has confirmed reserves of 208.6 billion barrelsalmost the 12% of the total world. Is it that important? Yes. Iran enjoys a strategic position that (among other things) allows it to control the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic point for the commercialization of Middle East oil. In fact, it is estimated that almost a fifth of the world’s crude oil and gas pass through that narrow strip of a few tens of kilometers. However, not all are advantages for Tehran. Most of the Iranian coastline is bathed by shallow waters that complicate the movement of oil tankers. To operate with them, companies need to rely on Khrag, an island equipped with deeper docks and which since the 60s has had a powerful infrastructure built with the help of the firm. Amoco. Today it is the largest terminal exporter of the country. A percentage: 90%. Kharg’s role is best understood by dealing with various data. The main one is the volume of merchandise that it channels. It is estimated that almost 90% of Iranian oil exports pass through there, a bottleneck through which black gold flows before being shipped to the Strait of Hormuz. It may seem like an exorbitant percentage, but the island has the necessary infrastructure to charge seven million of barrels daily. Added to this are underwater pipelines connected to the country’s oil fields, storage tanks and housing for the complex’s operators. In the spotlight. Khrag has become the key link in the Iranian oil trade, but it also represents a kind of ‘Achilles heel’. Hitting the island means hitting the Iranian oil industry squarely. It’s nothing new. In the 80s Kharg has already suffered Iraqi bombings. The big question on March 9, 2026, with the US and Israel attacking the Islamic Republic is… Does Washington have any plan that involves controlling the island in one way or another? It is not a whimsical question. The Israeli army already has attacked several crude oil deposits and an oil transfer center located in Tehran and Alborz. The Axios weekend wakefulness In addition, Israel and the US have discussed sending special forces to Iran for various purposes: the main one would be to secure uranium reserves, but Kharg would also be in their sights. Ground operation? However, it is one thing to attack oil deposits and another to invade the island. For a start, remembers CNBCbecause it would require going one step further in the offensive in Iran and undertaking a ground operation. A hypothetical attack could also add more volatility and uncertainty to the industry at a time when a barrel of oil has risen to around $100. In the last hours the Brent even it touched 120. Cutting off the tap. The maneuver would also have advantages for Washington and Tel Aviv, especially when it comes to putting pressure on Tehran. Petras Katinas, an expert in energy and defense, recalls that if the United States controlled the island it could cut off “the oil livelihood” of the Iranian regime. “Looking ahead, confiscation would give the US leverage during negotiations, regardless of which regime is in power once the military operation ends,” insist. “It would deal a severe blow to the regime, since it would deprive it of a crucial source of income,” adds Tamas Varga, an analyst at PVM, who draws a parallel between what happened in Iran and the US intervention in Venezuela. in january. Why doesn’t the US act? For several reasons. We mentioned two (fundamental) before. Experts point out that taking Kharg would require a ground operation. And that, among other issues, could lead to even more instability in the region and the oil market at a delicate time. “Kharg could focus a multi-week attack campaign with Iranian drones and the island has mines and soldiers,” remember Marc Gustafson, who warns that an intervention of this type would not be without risks for the United States. He even mentions the possibility that, if the situation escalates, Iran will destroy its oil pipelines. One island, many drifts. If the US and Israel decide to comply with Kharg, Tehran could also see legitimacy to hit the oil infrastructure of other Gulf countries. That’s not counting, insists Michael Doran (from the Hudson Institute) in that it could complicate the post-war Iranian economy and the stability of any new government that takes the reins of Iran once the war ends. Images | Google Earth and Wikipedia In Xataka | Satellite images have revealed that Iran knocked down four of the US’s eight unique defense systems. If they reach zero a new war begins

Iran’s drones have aimed at the same target as the US. And now that they have pulverized it, they are going to unleash their most dangerous weapon

by

In the Middle East there are radars capable of tracking objects thousands of kilometers and distinguish between dozens of targets in mid-flight. They are machines the size of a building, cost hundreds of millions of dollars and are part of the system that detects attacks before they even cross the atmosphere. However, in the current war they are discovering something uncomfortable: the greatest danger to these technological gems may come from weapons that cost a fraction of its price. The eyes of the shield. Since the beginning of the war, Iran has directed a very specific part of his attacks against an objective that rarely appears in the headlines but that underpins the entire defensive architecture of the United States in the Middle East: the radars that allow detecting and tracking missiles in flight. These sensors (like the AN/TPY-2 associated with the THAAD system or the gigantic AN/FPS-132 deployed in Qatar) act as the “eyes” of the regional anti-missile shield, feeding data to Patriot interceptors, THAAD or Aegis destroyers to destroy threats before they reach their objectives. However, several of these systems have been hit in the last days by Iranian attacks, some confirmed through satellite images. Among them is the strategic radar of the Al-Udeid base in Qatar, valued at nearly a billion dollars, and an AN/TPY-2 radar in Jordan directly linked to THAAD batteries. Other locations in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia or Bahrain as well have suffered impacts in facilities related to radar or communications, partially weakening the surveillance capacity of the regional defensive system. The shaheds against the most expensive system. The paradox of these attacks is that many of them have been carried out with unidirectional attack drones relatively cheap, like the Shahed, whose cost is only a fraction of the missiles and sensors they try to neutralize. While US systems were designed to intercept much more expensive and sophisticated ballistic or cruise missiles, Iran has bet for saturating or damaging them with much simpler platforms. These drones fly low and slow, which can make it difficult to detect for defenses designed for faster threats. Furthermore, the country has proven to have the capacity to produce them in large quantitiessomething that is already left patent in Ukraine with its export to Russia. In this war, that industrial advantage translates into a pretty clear strategy: launch constant waves of drones against sensors, command centers and communication systems, gradually eroding the network that allows us to detect threats in the air. An Army and Navy transportable surveillance radar (AN/TPY-2) positioned on Kwajalein Atoll during FTI-01 flight testing Blind the shield. The pattern that emerges suggests that these attacks are not simply scattered retaliation, but rather part of a much more calculated approach. Radars not only detect threats, they are the element that makes it possible to intercept them. Without them, even the most advanced anti-missile systems remain partially blind or rely on incomplete information. Hitting these sensors, therefore, has a multiplier effect– Each radar out of service increases the likelihood that future waves of attacks will penetrate defenses. In that sense, the Shahed seem to have aimed at the same target since the beginning of the conflict: the eyes of the American anti-missile shield. And the more that network is degraded, the greater the scope for other, more dangerous weapons (stored in underground silos and fortified bases) can come into play with greater chances of success. A satellite image taken on March 2, 2026 shows debris around a blackened THAAD radar at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan The problem of radars. The episode also highlights a structural weakness that analysts have long pointed out. Large early warning radars are extremely sophisticated, but also huge, expensive and largely static. Each one costs hundreds of millions or even billions of dollars and there are very few in the world, which means that replacing them can take years. At the same time, their size and fixed nature make them on relatively easy targets to locate through intelligence or commercial satellite images. Even seemingly minor damage can cause a “mission kill”that is, leaving the radar inoperative for long periods, even if the structure is still standing. In other words, a cheap drone can temporarily disable a central piece of the strategic defense of an entire region. The new logic of air war. Plus: what is happening reflects a deeper change in the way defensive systems are attacked. For decades it was assumed that destroying strategic radars required sophisticated missiles or large-scale complex attacks. The proliferation of drones has altered that equation. Today even actors with limited resources can employ cheap platforms to degrade sensors that cost hundreds of millions. This logic has already been seen in other conflictsfrom Ukrainian attacks against Russian radars to Israeli operations against Iranian air defenses. In all cases the principle is the same: “shoot the archer” before facing his arrows. If the system that detects threats disappears or is degraded, the entire shield loses effectiveness. A warning for the future. Beyond the immediate damage, these attacks have opened a broader strategic debate about resilience of American missile defense. The current architecture relies heavily on a small number of extremely valuable ground sensors. If those sensors are destroyed or neutralized, even temporarily, the defensive balance can quickly shift. That is why more and more experts advocate complementing or replacing part of these capabilities. with space sensors capable of tracking missiles from orbit, creating redundancy against ground attacks. However, these technologies, if they arrive, will take years to be fully deployed. Meanwhile, the current war has left an uncomfortable lesson: a system designed to stop the world’s most sophisticated weapons can be weakened. by swarms of drones cheap. And when the radars stop seeingthe next move on the board can be much more dangerous. Image | Google Earth, X, Missile Defense Agency, Airbus In Xataka | You’ve probably never heard of urea. The missiles in Iran are destroying their production, and that will affect your food In Xataka … Read more

If the question is how much of Europe is within range of Iran’s missiles, the answer is simple: a fairly large

by

In recent decades, the missile range It has become a silent measure of a country’s strategic power. Every few hundred kilometers added to their radius of action change not only technical maps, but also political calculations, alliances and perceptions of security. In this game of distances, Europe already it doesn’t appear that far away as before. From 1,300 to 3,000 km. It we count yesterday. Iran has built its deterrence on a missile family medium range (the Shahab-3, Sejjil, GhadrEmad or Khorramshahr) with ranges that start at 1,300 kilometers and are around 2,000–2,500 kilometers in most configurations, although certain variants of the Khorramshahr could approach 3,000 if they reduce payload. That threshold is what changes the European map, and the reason is very simple. With 2,000 kilometers, the eastern Mediterranean and southeastern Europe are clearly within the radiusand with 3,000, the arc of threat extends into the heart of the continent. The difference, therefore, is not technical, it is strategic. The eastern Mediterranean. Cyprus has been the clearest sign that the border is no longer theoretical. British bases of Akrotiri and Dhekeliaused as logistics and aerial projection nodes, are fully within range of both ballistic missiles and long-range drones such as the Shahed-136. In fact, Greece enters in the same arch, with Souda Bay in Crete within 2,300–2,400 kilometers from Iran. Athens, Sofia and Bucharest are among the capitals that fit comfortably within the 2,000 kilometer radius. Türkiye and Iraq: the exposed belt. Türkiye is located in the first critical strip. Incirlik, just over 1,000 kilometers from Tehran, is high value target for its role in allied architecture and its link to the nuclear sharing scheme. Kürecik, with its AN/TPY-2 radar, is the forward “eye” of the anti-missile shield and therefore a logical target in any prior suppression scenario. In Iraq, bases like Ain al-Asad or Erbil, in addition to the NATO mission in Baghdad, are not only within ballistic range, but also in the radius of drones and networks of militias supported by Tehran. Central Europe: the gray area. When the second and third arcs of the map are projected, cities appear like Budapest, Vienna or Bratislava on the periphery of the estimated range. Bucharest clearly enters the range of 2,000–2,500 kilometers, which places the base Aegis Ashore of Deveselu in a sensitive position within the maximum Iranian perimeter. If Khorramshahr really reached 3,000 kilometers, and that remains to be seen, the threat contour would touch cities like Berlin and Rome. Of course, just another hypothesis, but the pressure is expanding from the eastern flank towards the political center of Europe. The pieces of the shield and their limits. The Aegis Ashore system in Romaniathe one located in Poland and the Arleigh Burke destroyers in the Mediterranean they form the backbone of defense against Middle Eastern vectors. Germany, furthermore, has added the Arrow 3 system to reinforce its upper interception layer. However, any attack would have to fly over monitored airspace. like Türkiye, Iraq or Syriawhich adds operational complexity and interception windows. The shield exists, there is no doubt, but it does not eliminate the risk equation. Drones and saturation. Impossible to ignore it. Beyond ballistic missiles, Iran has turned attack drones into strategic multipliers. With ranges of up to 2,000–2,500 kilometers and costs much lower than missiles, they can be launched in waves to wear down defenses. Its previous use against British facilities in Cyprus demonstrates that the geographical barrier is no longer an automatic shield. The combination of expensive and cheap systems complicates defense. Underground and asymmetrical doctrine. As we count yesterday, the construction of “underground cities” to store and manufacture missiles is part of a strategy designed to compensate for the absence of a modern air force in Iran. Since 1979, sanctions pushed Tehran to invest in rockets, tunnels and technological alliances with other states, turning the missile into your main tool of deterrence. This asymmetric logic does not seek to equal the West in air and sea, but rather to impose cost and vulnerability from land. What changes strategically. As long as the effective range remains around 2,000 kilometers, the threat is mainly concentrated in the eastern Mediterranean and southeast Europe. If the actual ceiling is close to 3,000 km, the european political map enters the calculation. The difference between 2,400 and 3,000 kilometers is not a technical nuance, because it is the line that separates the periphery of the continental core. In that margin, a priori, the perception of risk for European capitals and the credibility of allied deterrence are at stake. Image | Mahdi Marizad, Defense Intelligence Agency, Mehr News Agency In Xataka | The arrival of the B-2s to Iran can only mean one thing: the search for the greatest threat to the United States has begun In Xataka | Iran has just attacked a base in Europe: the paradox of Spain is that it condemns the war, but the US does not need to ask to use its bases

Israel is obsessed with Iran’s nuclear bomb project. What hides is your own unofficial atomic arsenal

by

With the conflict of the Middle East there is a paradox. Israel has been saying that Iran is about to Have nuclear weaponssomething that nobody is certain that it is so, at least not in its entirety. In fact, it is one of the most repeated issues these days how far the Iranian “nuclear theme” reaches. And yet, no one asks the question in reverse. What happens to Israel’s nuclear program? Iran’s “bombs”. It We count yesterday. Despite the alarms on by Netanyahu for more than a decade (like that famous bomb cart that showed in the UN in 2012), there are no conclusive tests that Iran has made the decision to manufacture a nuclear weapon. While the country has enriched uranium to nearby levels to the military And it has accumulated reservations that, technically, could serve to produce several bombs with greater purification, both US intelligence services and the International Atomic Energy Agency agree that It has not been detected An active weapon program. Iran has become A “threshold state”with the ability to arm himself if he decided, but without evidence of crossed that threshold. Single side. And while Israel displays All your military force To dismantle what he considers an existential threat (Iran’s nuclear program), he does so carrying his own atomic arsenal, no officially recognized But increasingly evident. The war that Israel has undertaken against Tehran seeks to destroy Key facilities That, according to international experts, they could provide Iran that atomic bomb in a matter of months. However, in a gesture of paradoxical silence, Israel has never confirmed or denied the existence of its own nuclear program. At the diplomatic level, it maintains an ambiguous formula: ensures that it will not be the first country to “introduce” nuclear weapons in the Middle East. That phrase, deliberately inaccurate, allows you to preserve a discourse of prudence while preserving what most analysts consider a consolidated and growing atomic capacity. Hidden but feared. In fact, the play is doubly winner. Had the New York Times that the most conservative calculations attribute to Israel a minimum of 90 Nuclear Ojivas lists to be deployed, with sufficient fistening material reserves to manufacture hundreds more. Although its arsenal is the second smallest of the nine countries recognized informally as nuclear powers, Just ahead North Korea, its delivery capacity It is advanced: Balistic missiles, modified and submarine combat aircraft endowed with missiles with nuclear capacity constitute a complete deterrence triad. Israel’s absence in the Nuclear Non -Proliferation Treaty (which is also not part of Indian, Pakistan or North Korea) reinforces the legal exceptionality of your situation. The treaty, in force since 1970only recognizes the five nations that detonated atomic weapons before 1967: United States, Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom. Any other country that signed should, in theorygive up this armament. Israel has avoided that commitment, thus maintaining a strategic freedom that allows it to operate outside international inspections or explicit limitations. Dimona’s secret. And here comes one of the keys to the heart. The heart of the Israeli nuclear program beats in the Néguev desert, at the facilities of Dimona. Founded in 1958 With French help, this installation was Inspection object Americans during the 1960s, but since then it has remained Out of reach of any international monitoring. Broarship intelligence documents They revealed Already in 1960 that the complex included a plant of Plutonium reprocessingwhich implied a military objective. By 1967, Israel had managed to develop nuclear explosives And in 1973, during the Yom Kipur WarThe United States already assumed with certainty that the country He had atomic bombs. Throughout the decades, various satellite images have documented significant extensions In Dimonaand some Recent reports They indicate that Israel could even be building a new reactor to increase its plutonium production capacity, the material indispensable for both nuclear weapons and certain peaceful uses. Silent deterrence. Unlike dozens of countries that are accepted to the nuclear umbrella From the United States for its defense, Israel has opted for its own atomic shield. This strategic independence suggests that Israel not only has nuclear weapons, but is willing to use them As a last resort If its existence is compromised. Although you have never used these weapons in combat, There are reports which point to their preparation during the wars of 1967 and 1973. It is also suspected that Israel participated in Secret nuclear trialsas the famous incident of the American satellite Watches in 1979which detected a double light explosion near the Indian Ocean. Although the nation denied its involvement, newspapers of President Jimmy Carter recorded the Strong suspicion that Israel and South Africa collaborated in that clandestine test. Be that as it may, those events still are not confirmed, although the most relevant documents continue to classified, which feeds suspicions. The strategic logic. In short, and despite Your official opacitythe existence of Israeli nuclear arsenal seems tacitly recognized for its exclusion of otherwise protection mechanisms. The fact that it is not part of the American deterrence is interpreted by experts such as the clearest nonverbal confirmation of its independent atomic capacity. In the eyes of the Israeli government, this decision responds to A philosophy deeply rooted: no one but Israel can and should guarantee their survival. I remembered the Times that this logic, heiress of foundational trauma From the Holocaust, it was explicitly expressed By Ernst David Bergmann, president of the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission, stating that the atomic bomb was the only guarantee that “we will never be taken as lambs to the slaughterhouse.” No doubt, that principle continues to guide Israeli nuclear doctrine: maintain a sufficiently ambiguous capacity not to cause international reactions, but powerful enough to deter any real aggression. Image | Planet Lab, The Official CTBO In Xataka | Israel’s great goal in his war against Iran is to destroy Fordow. And you can only get it with a bomb that has USA In Xataka | Ukraine was the anticipation of what Israel has done: war is no longer … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.