In a televised address, Trump said U.S. forces had delivered “swift, decisive” results during 32 days of operations launched after joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran on Feb. 28. He added that Washington was “on track to complete all of America’s military objectives shortly,” while warning of further heavy attacks if no agreement is reached.

The conflict has triggered widespread regional instability, with Iranian retaliatory strikes targeting Israel, U.S. bases and Gulf states, and opening a parallel front in Lebanon. Thousands have been killed across the region since the escalation began.

Trump reiterated that the U.S. military campaign aimed to neutralize Iran’s strategic capabilities, including its nuclear program, saying recent strikes had prevented Tehran from obtaining nuclear weapons. He did not provide evidence to support the claim.Despite the escalation, diplomatic prospects remain uncertain.

A senior Iranian source told Reuters that Tehran is demanding a guaranteed ceasefire before halting its attacks and has not engaged in indirect talks on a temporary truce. Iran has also denied U.S. assertions that it requested a ceasefire.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian, in a message addressed to the American public, said Iran holds no hostility toward ordinary U.S. citizens, though official positions suggest limited willingness to enter negotiations at this stage.The war has disrupted global energy markets, particularly after Iran effectively shut the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for roughly 20% of global oil and gas shipments.

Trump dismissed the strategic necessity of the passage for the United States and urged allies dependent on Gulf energy supplies to take steps to reopen it.Financial markets reacted negatively to the lack of a clear diplomatic roadmap, with global equities falling and oil prices rising following Trump’s address.

The International Monetary Fund, World Bank and International Energy Agency warned the conflict was having “substantial, global and highly asymmetric” economic effects and signaled coordination on potential support measures.U.S. officials said backchannel discussions involving intermediaries, including Pakistan, were ongoing, though no breakthrough has been reported.

Trump indicated he remained open to a deal but warned that failure to reach one could result in expanded strikes, including potential targeting of Iran’s electricity infrastructure.The U.S. president also renewed pressure on allies, suggesting countries reliant on Middle Eastern energy should take a more active role in ensuring maritime security in the region.

European officials, however, have cautioned against military operations in the Strait of Hormuz, citing concerns over international law.

Trump has also raised the prospect of reassessing U.S. commitments to the NATO, criticizing what he described as insufficient support from European allies in addressing the crisis.

The statement, issued by Iran’s foreign ministry and shared with IMO member states and non-governmental organizations, said vessels that do not “participate in or support acts of aggression” against Iran would be permitted safe passage through the strategic waterway, subject to adherence to safety and security regulations.

However, it specified that vessels, equipment, and assets belonging to what it described as “aggressor parties” including the United States and Israel would not qualify for what it termed “innocent or non-hostile passage.

”Iran said responsibility for any disruption or escalation in the Strait of Hormuz lay with Washington and Tel Aviv, accusing them of waging an “unlawful and destabilising war” that has heightened risks to international shipping and regional stability.

The statement reflects Tehran’s position as tensions remain elevated following the outbreak of war triggered by U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28.

The Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints, has been effectively closed since the escalation, contributing to sharp increases in global oil and gas prices.

Iran’s conditional reopening for select vessels introduces limited operational clarity for commercial shipping, though the exclusion of U.S. and Israeli-linked assets underscores the continuing strategic and geopolitical risks in the region.

QatarEnergy said its emergency teams contained fires at Ras Laffan, the centre of the country’s liquefied natural gas operations, with authorities reporting no casualties.

The facility, located about 80 km north of Doha, is a key global energy hub processing a significant share of the world’s LNG supply.

QatarEnergy said several LNG facilities were hit in early Thursday strikes, causing “sizeable fires” and further structural damage. The Pearl gas-to-liquids plant, one of the world’s largest of its kind, suffered extensive damage, the company added.

International energy firms operating in Ras Laffan began assessing the impact. Shell, which holds stakes in multiple LNG projects at the site, said it was evaluating potential disruptions to its assets.

Qatar produces around 77 million metric tons of LNG annually, making it the world’s second-largest exporter, and Ras Laffan plays a central role in processing and export operations.

The United Arab Emirates said it intercepted incoming missiles and temporarily shut gas facilities as a precautionary measure. Authorities reported no injuries.

The attacks followed Iranian evacuation warnings for energy installations across Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Qatar, issued after strikes on Iran’s own infrastructure, including the South Pars and Asaluyeh energy complexes.

Qatar condemned the strike as a threat to national security and ordered Iranian diplomatic staff linked to defence and security to leave the country within 24 hours, declaring them persona non grata.

Trump, responding on social media, warned Iran against further targeting Qatari LNG infrastructure and said the United States would respond forcefully if such attacks were repeated. He added that Israel’s earlier strike on Iran’s South Pars gas field had occurred without prior notification to Washington or Doha.

The escalation marks a widening of the conflict into critical Gulf energy infrastructure, raising concerns over sustained disruptions to global gas supplies and heightened geopolitical risk across the region.

Responding to escalating tensions and recent remarks by U.S. President Donald Trump hinting at military involvement against Iran, Marandi declared that if the United States were to enter into war with Iran, the governments of Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain “would not last more than a few days, or even a few hours.”

“It’s time to leave Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain immediately,” Marandi added ominously — a clear signal that Iran sees U.S. bases and partnerships in these countries as legitimate wartime targets. The statement comes amid increasing regional anxiety following Israeli strikes in Syria and Lebanon, and fears that a broader war involving Iran could engulf the Middle East.

Yet, what was more telling than Marandi’s threat was his silence on Saudi Arabia — the region’s heavyweight. This omission was not lost on analysts.

Aimen Dean, former MI6 spy inside Al-Qaeda and author of Nine Lives, pointed out the striking inconsistency. He wrote, “Iran’s Ariana News Agency just issued a threat that if the United States attacks Iran then it will retaliate against Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and UAE! No mention of Saudi Arabia, yet it’s all the same, as these countries are part of a mutual GCC defence treaty with Saudi.”

Strategic Messaging or Calculated Restraint?

Marandi’s threats appear designed to create fear and pressure among Gulf states that host American military assets, such as Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar and the Fifth Fleet in Bahrain. These are not empty words — they serve as psychological warfare aimed at dividing the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), deterring further cooperation with Washington, and shaking the confidence of local populations.

But the absence of Saudi Arabia in this threat matrix is intriguing. Some analysts believe it reflects Tehran’s ongoing efforts to preserve the fragile diplomatic thaw with Riyadh. Since the China-brokered rapprochement in 2023, Iran and Saudi Arabia have restored diplomatic ties and engaged in dialogue over Yemen, energy coordination, and regional security. Directly threatening Saudi Arabia now could reverse months of careful detente.

Others argue that Iran’s silence on Saudi Arabia is purely tactical. “Tehran knows that any overt threat to Riyadh would trigger a massive and unified GCC—and potentially wider Arab—response,” said a Gulf-based security expert. “It’s playing chess, not checkers.”

A Wider Conflict Looms?

As tensions soar between the United States and Iran, the Gulf region once again finds itself caught in the middle of a high-stakes confrontation. While Iran frames its threats as a response to potential aggression, its messaging exposes the vulnerability of smaller Gulf states and highlights their strategic importance to Washington’s military presence in the region.

The United States, for its part, has not publicly responded to Marandi’s threats. However, military readiness has increased in the region. Additional U.S. naval deployments to the Gulf and increased coordination with Israel signal that Washington is preparing for multiple scenarios.

Meanwhile, GCC member states are left to weigh the risks. The threat of being used as a battlefield in a confrontation between Washington and Tehran looms large. Yet, so does the cost of abandoning decades of military and economic cooperation with the United States.