Prepared and Analyzed by | Strategic Media Department – BETH News Agency

Introduction: A War Beyond Geography

Ten days after the outbreak of the war that began on February 28 between Iran on one side and the United States and Israel on the other, the confrontation is no longer merely an exchange of military strikes.

Today, the region is witnessing a multi-dimensional war, where airstrikes, economic pressure, cyberattacks, and information warfare across social media platforms intersect.

As the scope of escalation expands, a key question emerges:

Are we witnessing a limited war with specific objectives… or a moment that may reshape the balance of power in the Middle East?

The Results of the First Ten Days

So far, four major outcomes can be observed:

First: The United States and Israel have moved the battlefield into the Iranian interior through strikes targeting military infrastructure and strategic locations.

Second: The direct Iranian response against Israel has remained militarily limited compared with the scale of strikes Iran has received.

Third: The circle of risk has expanded to include the global economy, with rising oil prices and disruptions to air and maritime navigation in the region.

Fourth: The war has moved beyond traditional military confrontation into the model of hybrid warfare, including cyber operations, digital propaganda, and information manipulation.

What Does the United States Want?

Official American rhetoric focuses on two main objectives:

Undermining Iran’s missile and military capabilities

Preventing Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon

However, a broader political reading suggests an additional undeclared goal:

Reshaping the balance of power in Iran and the region in a way that reduces Tehran’s ability to threaten international shipping routes and global energy networks.

What Does Israel Want?

For Israel, the objectives appear clearer and more assertive.

The goal is not limited to reducing Iran’s military capabilities, but goes beyond that to include:

Dismantling regional influence networks linked to Tehran

Striking missile and nuclear infrastructure

Politically weakening the Iranian regime and possibly opening the door to internal change

Thus, the war becomes for Tel Aviv a long-term existential confrontation.

What Do the Gulf States Want ..  And What Is Intended for Them?

Amid the noise of the war between the United States and Israel on one side and Iran on the other, a less discussed question emerges in international analysis:

What do the Gulf states and the Arab world want from this war?
And what could this war ultimately produce for them?

So far, the Gulf states – led by Saudi Arabia – appear to be approaching the conflict from a perspective different from the warring parties.

While the competing powers seek strategic or military gains, the Gulf states aim to prevent the war from becoming a permanent reality in the region.

Massive development projects, major economic transformations, and global investments flowing into the region all depend on one essential condition:

Stability.

This places the Gulf states in a unique position today:

They are not parties to the war, yet they are not distant from its consequences.

Why Are Gulf States Not Entering the War?

So far, the Gulf states – particularly Saudi Arabia – have adopted a strategy of calculated restraint.

They are strengthening their air defenses and intercepting attacks, while avoiding direct involvement in the conflict.

This approach reflects a clear strategic reading:

Entering the war might produce an immediate response, but it would also grant Tehran what it may be seeking—

Expanding the battlefield and turning the conflict into a full-scale regional war.

Why Is the Gulf Being Targeted?

Despite repeated confirmation by Gulf states that they are not parties to the war, facilities and airspace in the region have been repeatedly targeted by missiles and drones.

The Iranian objective appears to go beyond a direct military response, moving instead toward raising the global cost of the war by threatening energy sources and vital maritime routes.

Pressure on the Gulf effectively means pressure on the global economy.

Gulf Capabilities .. And the Deterrence Equation

The war has also revealed an important aspect related to Gulf capabilities.

Advanced air defense systems in the Gulf states have succeeded in intercepting a large percentage of missiles and drones, reflecting a clear development in the defensive deterrence structure of the region.

However, the Gulf strategy does not rely on military response alone, but on a combination of deterrence, diplomacy, and restraint.

This explains the decision to avoid direct involvement in the war despite repeated attacks.

What Could This War Produce?

The final outcome of the war will not be determined only on the battlefield, but in the regional order that emerges afterward.

Two main possibilities exist:

First: The war may deepen divisions and conflicts, leaving the Middle East as a region of permanent tension.

Second: The strategic shock produced by the war may push regional actors to reconsider security arrangements and economic cooperation.

Under this scenario, the region could gradually move from a theater of conflict to an arena of economic and developmental competition.

BETH Reading

In moments of major wars, the future of a region is not determined only by those who fight, but also by those who seek to avoid the war.

In the Middle East today, the Gulf states appear to be trying to preserve a different path:

A path based on development, stability, and economic openness.

Therefore, the most important outcome of this war may not be who wins militarily…

But who succeeds in protecting their future after the war.

Cyber Warfare: The Hidden Front

Alongside the military confrontation, digital warfare is intensifying.

Cyberattacks target platforms and digital services in order to disrupt internal stability and create information chaos.

This type of warfare does not destroy cities… but it undermines trust and psychological stability within societies.

The Social Media War

This front may be the most influential on public opinion.

Over the past days, waves of fabricated videos and misleading information have spread widely, creating an information fog in which it becomes difficult to distinguish truth from propaganda.

Here, the goal shifts from persuading the public to confusing it.

When truth and falsehood become indistinguishable, audiences begin to lose trust in all narratives

When Could the War End?

Current assessments suggest three possible scenarios:

First: A ceasefire following a phase of military attrition and global economic pressure.

Second: A temporary truce that freezes the fighting without resolving its root causes.

Third: A wider regional conflict if additional actors enter the battlefield.

At present, there are no clear indications of an imminent end, but it is certain that a prolonged war would increase pressure on the global economy and energy markets.

The Region After the War: Conflict or Integration?

The larger question does not concern the war itself… but what comes afterward.

This war could lead to two contrasting paths:

Either greater division and conflict across the region,
or a new phase of economic pragmatism, pushing states to reduce tensions and focus on development.

However, current indicators suggest that the road toward stability will not be short.

BETH Reading

After ten days of war, the region appears to be standing at a historic crossroads.

The United States seeks a militarily weaker Iran.
Israel seeks a weaker Iran, and possibly a weaker Iranian regime as well.
Iran seeks to raise the cost of the war for everyone through energy routes and maritime pressure.

Meanwhile, the Gulf states – led by Saudi Arabia – seek to protect their security and stability without being drawn into a wider war.

Amid this turbulent scene, the central question remains open:

Will this war end by redrawing the map of conflict…
or by redrawing the map of cooperation in the Middle East?

As the War Passes the Midpoint of Day Ten

As the conflict moves past the midpoint of its tenth day and evening approaches, BETH presents the latest developments:

European countries are considering launching a new naval mission to secure navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, amid growing concerns over threats to global trade and energy flows.

Turkey announced the interception of an Iranian ballistic missile in the eastern Mediterranean, stating that NATO air defense systems destroyed the missile, and stressing that Ankara will take all necessary measures to protect the country.

The United Arab Emirates announced the detection of 15 ballistic missiles in the region’s airspace, in a development reflecting the widening scope of missile threats.

Israeli media reported the destruction of an aircraft fleet belonging to the Quds Force at Mehrabad Airport in Tehran.

European countries condemned the Iranian attacks, stating that Tehran targeted the region with missiles and drones.

Russian President Vladimir Putin congratulated Mojtaba Hosseini Khamenei on his election as Iran’s new Supreme Leader, reaffirming Moscow’s continued support for Tehran.

The Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that there is currently no room for discussions about a ceasefire.

BETH Comment

Developments on the tenth day reveal that the war is no longer merely a limited military confrontation, but is gradually evolving into a regional security crisis with international dimensions.

European discussions about deploying a naval mission in the Strait of Hormuz, along with NATO missile interceptions, indicate that concerns now extend beyond the battlefield to the security of global trade and energy routes.

Meanwhile, Iran’s rejection of a ceasefire suggests that Tehran continues to rely on prolonging the confrontation in order to raise the cost of the war for its adversaries.

Russia’s congratulation to Iran’s new leadership adds a geopolitical dimension to the conflict, highlighting that the ongoing war cannot be understood solely as a military confrontation, but also as part of broader international power dynamics.

New Leadership… Ongoing Conflict

Tehran’s announcement of the transfer of leadership to Mojtaba Khamenei at the height of escalating tensions suggests that Iran is seeking to project political cohesion despite the strikes. However, the U.S. rejection indicates that the confrontation may not remain purely military, but could increasingly involve a struggle over the political legitimacy of the regime itself.

Conflicting Signals on the Battlefield…

The War Enters a Phase of Uncertainty

Trump’s Statement on the End of the War

U.S. President Donald Trump said that “the war in Iran has largely ended.”

BETH Analysis:
This does not necessarily mean that military operations have completely stopped. Rather, it likely indicates that Washington believes it has achieved the objectives of the first phase of the war.

Such statements are often used to signal that the main strikes have been carried out and that the balance of power has become clearer, even if skirmishes or limited operations continue.

Reading the Israeli Statement

Remarks by an Israeli official about the possibility of ending the war without overthrowing the Iranian regime suggest that Tel Aviv may have reassessed its war objectives.

Instead of pursuing a difficult and far-reaching goal such as regime change, the focus may shift toward weakening Iran’s military capabilities or reducing its nuclear program while maintaining political and military pressure.

The American Threat Message

Reports that Washington is open to the assassination of Iran’s new Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei carry a strong message of pressure.

This does not necessarily mean an immediate decision, but rather appears intended to raise the level of threat and push Iran’s leadership to consider the cost of escalation or rejecting U.S. demands.

Iranian Escalation

In contrast, Iran’s announcement that it may begin launching missiles with warheads weighing a ton or more reflects an attempt to demonstrate that its military capabilities remain intact and that it can raise the level of response.

Such statements often fall within the framework of psychological warfare and efforts to reinforce deterrence.

The Overall Picture… by Midnight of Day Ten

The opposing signals suggest that the war may be entering a different new phase:

Washington speaks of the war largely ending

Israel considers ending it without regime change

Iran signals the possibility of greater escalation

This could mean that the conflict is gradually shifting from a phase of major strikes to a stage of political and military pressure between the opposing sides.