Back to Headlines
World Wide
Jun 07, 2026
Analyzed by GPT OSS 120B

Global Reactions to the US‑Israel War on Iran: Diplomatic Stances, Regional Tensions, and Economic Fallout

AI Summary
The US‑Israel offensive against Iran has entered its 100th day, sparking a worldwide energy crisis and a cascade of diplomatic responses. Regional powers, global institutions and mediators such as Pakistan are navigating a complex landscape of military escalations, economic shocks, and calls for de‑escalation.

The US‑Israel offensive against Iran has entered its 100th day, igniting a global energy crisis and prompting a spectrum of diplomatic responses from allies, regional powers, and international bodies.

A Hundred Days of Conflict and a Global Energy Shock

The war began on February 28 and quickly spread to Gulf nations and Lebanon. A fragile cease‑fire was declared on April 8, yet hostilities continued, with Israel’s attacks in Lebanon killing over 3,000 people. The conflict has already reshaped global oil markets, driving price spikes and heightening market volatility.

Human Toll and Regional Escalation

Beyond the casualties in Lebanon, the Gulf region has endured missile and drone strikes on civilian infrastructure, ports, and energy facilities. Notable incidents include drone attacks on Oman’s Duqm and Salalah ports in early March, and the targeting of Qatar’s Al Udeid airbase. Iran’s retaliatory actions have also reached Iraq, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, further widening the theater of war.

Economic Ripples: Oil Prices, Fuel Shortfalls, and Market Volatility

The war’s disruption of the Strait of Hormuz has amplified concerns over fuel security. Africa, which produces roughly 12% of global oil reserves, imports more than 70% of its refined fuel. The Africa Finance Corporation warns of an 86 million‑tonne fuel shortfall by 2040, underscoring the continent’s vulnerability to price swings triggered by the conflict.

Diplomatic Landscape: How Nations and Organizations Have Reacted

  • Oman: Initially expressed dismay, later dragged into attacks on its ports; mediates US‑Iran nuclear talks.
  • Qatar: Condemned Iranian missile strikes, expelled Iranian personnel, and urged diplomatic dialogue.
  • UAE: Denounced attacks, reportedly conducted air strikes against Iran in coordination with the US and Israel.
  • Bahrain and Kuwait: Called Iranian attacks “treacherous” and pushed UN resolutions, though vetoed by China and Russia.
  • Saudi Arabia: Condemned Iranian aggression, maintained oil exports via Red Sea ports, and allegedly struck Iranian targets.
  • Iraq: Balances ties with Iran and the US, faced PMF‑US clashes, and declared force majeure on foreign‑operated oilfields.
  • Turkiye: Called for an end to violence, protested an Iranian missile breach, and joined diplomatic tours with Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan.
  • Jordan and Egypt: Urged de‑escalation and engaged in diplomatic talks with Iranian counterparts.
  • African Union: Condemned aggression against Gulf states and highlighted soaring food and fuel prices across the continent.
  • Pakistan: Played a central mediating role, hosting talks and urging a diplomatic resolution.

Looking Ahead: Mediation, Ceasefire Prospects, and Potential Shifts

While a cease‑fire was renewed between Israel and Lebanon on April 16, violations persist. Diplomatic channels led by Pakistan and supported by regional actors remain the primary avenue for de‑escalation. The continuation of oil‑price volatility and humanitarian costs will likely pressure both the US‑Israel coalition and Iran toward a negotiated settlement, though the timeline remains uncertain.