By Lina Irawan 
The conflagration over Tehran’s primary fuel storage facilities marked a critical and dangerous escalation in the swiftly intensifying conflict, pushing the region further into uncharted territory. This unprecedented targeting of civilian industrial infrastructure, confirmed by Israel’s military, sent a stark message about the broadening scope and brutality of hostilities. Associated Press video captured the ominous spectacle, showing the horizon glowing with an infernal orange against the night sky above the Iranian capital, a chilling visual testament to the direct strike.
Iranian state media was quick to attribute the devastating attack to "an attack from the U.S. and the Zionist regime," framing it as an act of aggression against a vital facility that supplies not only Tehran but also critical neighboring provinces in the north. This narrative, while predictable, underscored the regime’s immediate attempt to rally public sentiment and deflect from any internal vulnerabilities. Experts suggest that targeting such a facility aims to cripple Iran’s logistical capabilities, disrupt its domestic economy, and exert immense pressure on the civilian population, potentially leading to fuel shortages and economic instability, further inflaming an already volatile situation. This move deviates significantly from previous strikes primarily aimed at military installations, leadership compounds, or suspected nuclear sites, signalling a new, more punitive phase of the war.
Earlier in the day, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian had made a rare and seemingly hurried apology for "attacks on neighboring countries," even as his country’s ballistic missiles and drones continued their relentless flight toward Gulf Arab states. This contradictory stance highlighted a deepening and dangerous rift within Iran’s ruling elite, a power struggle between factions looking to de-escalate the burgeoning war and hard-liners who remain unequivocally committed to battling the United States and Israel. The conflicting statements emanated from two of the three members of the hastily formed leadership council overseeing Iran since the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the war’s opening airstrikes, underscoring the severe instability at the apex of the Islamic Republic’s power structure.
Khamenei’s sudden demise, a seismic event in Iranian politics, left a vacuum at the heart of the theocracy, necessitating the establishment of an interim leadership council. Pezeshkian, representing a more pragmatic and perhaps desperate wing, appeared to be attempting to open a diplomatic window, acknowledging the regional fallout of Iran’s aggressive posture. His apology, however, was immediately undermined by the ongoing barrage of missiles and drones, a clear indication of the paramilitary Revolutionary Guard’s formidable autonomy and its ideological alignment with the hardline faction. The Revolutionary Guard, historically answering only to the Supreme Leader, now appears to be charting its own course, picking targets independently and effectively bypassing the civilian leadership’s directives, profoundly complicating any potential diplomatic efforts.
Adding to the diplomatic impasse, Pezeshkian also firmly dismissed U.S. President Donald Trump’s unequivocal call for Tehran to surrender unconditionally, retorting with defiance: "That’s a dream that they should take to their grave." This rejection underscored Iran’s deep-seated ideological resistance to external pressure, even amidst severe military setbacks.
Meanwhile, aboard Air Force One, President Trump escalated his own rhetoric, threatening that Iran would be "hit very hard" and that more "areas and groups of people" would become targets, without offering specific elaborations. This veiled warning suggested a further expansion of targets beyond purely military objectives, mirroring Israel’s strike on the oil facility. The week-old conflict has already sent shockwaves through global markets, particularly in the energy sector, causing significant spikes in oil and gasoline prices and contributing to widespread economic uncertainty. Domestically, hundreds of Israeli and American airstrikes have demonstrably weakened Iran’s leadership, decimating key military assets and command structures, yet failing to achieve a decisive capitulation.
"We’re not looking to settle," Trump told reporters Saturday, emphasizing a posture of unrelenting pressure. "They’d like to settle. We’re not looking to settle." He characterized the ongoing U.S. military operations in Iran as an "excursion," a term that downplays the gravity of a full-scale regional conflict but perhaps implies a limited, albeit forceful, engagement aimed at achieving specific objectives rather than an open-ended occupation. Trump confidently asserted that issues such as rising gas prices and the safety of Americans would improve significantly once the conflict reached its conclusion, projecting an image of control and inevitable victory.
Pezeshkian’s message, reportedly recorded in haste, starkly illuminated the limited powers exercised by the theocracy’s civilian leaders over the formidable paramilitary Revolutionary Guard. This elite force, which controls Iran’s vast arsenal of ballistic missiles targeting Israel and other countries, has historically operated with a high degree of autonomy, its loyalty primarily to the Supreme Leader. With Khamenei’s death, the Guard’s command structure and ultimate allegiance have become a critical point of contention and uncertainty, enabling it to pursue its own strategic objectives, potentially irrespective of the interim council’s diplomatic overtures. Pezeshkian’s statement explicitly declared that Iran’s leadership council had been in contact with the armed forces and had ordered that "from now on, they should not attack neighboring countries or fire missiles at them, unless we are attacked by those countries. I think we should solve this through diplomacy." This directive, however, was immediately contradicted by events on the ground, revealing the Guard’s continued independent actions. It’s crucial to note that the U.S. strikes against Iran have not originated from the Gulf Arab governments under attack, but rather from U.S. bases and naval assets strategically positioned throughout the region.
In stark contrast to Pezeshkian’s conciliatory tone, hard-line judiciary chief Gholam Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, another influential member of the three-man leadership council, defiantly suggested that Iran’s war strategy would remain unaltered. "The geography of some countries in the region — both overtly and covertly — is in the hands of the enemy, and those points are used against our country in acts of aggression. Intense attacks on these targets will continue," he posted on X, signaling a refusal to back down and a justification for continued regional assaults. Further reinforcing this hardline stance, Iran’s Parliament speaker and former Revolutionary Guard general, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, also took to X, stating, "As long as the presence of U.S. bases in the region continue, the countries will not enjoy peace." He explicitly linked Iran’s defense policies to the guidance of the late supreme leader, effectively challenging Pezeshkian’s attempts at de-escalation by invoking Khamenei’s legacy.
Adding another layer of complexity to the unfolding narrative, Iran’s U.N. mission later issued a statement, suggesting, without providing concrete evidence, that strikes on nonmilitary sites "may have resulted from interception by U.S. electronic defense systems." This claim, while unsubstantiated, reflects Iran’s attempts to deflect blame and sow doubt about the precision of coalition strikes. Late Saturday, top Iranian security official Ali Larijani, in an address carried by state media, attempted to project an image of unity, asserting that "our leaders are united on this issue and have no disagreements with one another," a statement that directly contradicted the evident public rift. Larijani also announced that the leadership council had requested "arrangements be made" to convene the Assembly of Experts to choose the next supreme leader, though he did not specify a timeline. This crucial political process, traditionally a lengthy and highly secretive affair, is now unfolding under the immense pressure of a regional war, its outcome poised to redefine Iran’s future trajectory.
On the international front, President Trump reiterated his decision to exclude Kurdish forces from the conflict, despite previous indications of their willingness to assist in efforts to topple the Iranian government. "The war is complicated enough without having — getting the Kurds involved," Trump told reporters. This decision likely stems from the complex geopolitical realities of the Middle East, where involving Kurdish fighters could provoke significant backlash from Turkey, a NATO ally, and further destabilize Iraq. Days prior, Kurdish officials had informed the AP that Kurdish-Iranian dissident groups based in northern Iraq were actively preparing for a potential cross-border military operation into Iran, with the U.S. having reportedly asked Iraqi Kurds for their support. Trump’s reversal underscores the delicate balancing act involved in coalition warfare and the potential for unintended consequences.
The military campaign, meanwhile, showed no signs of abating. A university student in western Tehran, speaking anonymously due to severe security concerns, described the harrowing reality: "Tehran is under severe bombardment," and even civilians far from military and government targets are living in constant fear. Earlier on Saturday, Israel announced it had struck a Tehran airport, which it alleged was being used for the illicit transfer of weapons and cash to militant groups, further highlighting the strategic depth of the attacks. The stated goals and timelines of the U.S. and Israel in this conflict have repeatedly shifted, at times suggesting a desire to topple Iran’s government, or merely to degrade its military capabilities and nuclear program, or to elevate new leadership, creating confusion and uncertainty about the ultimate objectives.
The human toll of the week-old conflict has been devastating and continues to mount. Officials in the affected countries report at least 1,230 people killed in Iran, over 290 in Lebanon, and 11 in Israel. Additionally, six U.S. troops have tragically lost their lives. The relentless exchange of fire means that incoming missiles from Iran continued to send Israeli citizens scrambling to bomb shelters, though mercifully, no new casualties were immediately reported from these particular barrages.
Further evidence of the conflict’s regional destabilization emerged from Iraq, where three Iraqi security officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, confirmed that a missile had landed on the helicopter landing pad within the heavily fortified U.S. embassy complex in Baghdad’s Green Zone. An embassy spokesperson declined to comment, but there were no immediate reports of casualties. This incident marked the first reported strike to land directly within Baghdad’s Green Zone since the war began, escalating fears of broader Iraqi involvement. Iran and its allied Iraqi militias have launched dozens of attacks on U.S. military bases and other facilities in Iraq in the preceding week, but this direct targeting of the embassy signals a dangerous escalation. Iraq’s caretaker Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani swiftly condemned the embassy attack as a "terrorist act" carried out by "rogue groups," attempting to distance his government from the perpetrators and reaffirm Iraq’s commitment to protecting diplomatic missions.
The conflict’s ripple effect continued across the Persian Gulf, directly impacting U.S. allies who have expressed concerns that the Trump administration did not provide them with adequate time to prepare for the sudden onset of hostilities. Hours after Pezeshkian’s apology, the United Arab Emirates reported that debris from an aerial interception fell onto a vehicle, killing an "Asian driver." This brings the total number of fatalities in the UAE to four since the war began, all reported to be foreign nationals, underscoring the indiscriminate nature of the conflict. Earlier on Saturday, sirens blared across Bahrain as Iran targeted the island kingdom, a critical U.S. naval hub. Saudi Arabia announced it had successfully destroyed drones heading toward its vast Shaybah oil field, a cornerstone of its immense oil production capacity, and shot down a ballistic missile launched toward Prince Sultan Air Base, which hosts a significant contingent of U.S. forces. In the bustling metropolis of Dubai, several blasts were heard Saturday morning, prompting the government to activate its air defenses. Passengers awaiting flights at the world-renowned Dubai International Airport were dramatically ushered into train tunnels for safety, a stark image of how quickly regional stability can unravel under the shadow of war. The expanding geographical scope of the conflict, from the streets of Tehran to the skies over Dubai and the diplomatic compounds in Baghdad, highlights the rapidly deteriorating security landscape and the profound, unpredictable challenges facing the entire Middle East.