Reflecting the consequences of the war against Iran in the world media

Since the beginning of the military aggression of the United States and the Zionist regime against Iran, not only the declared goals of this operation have not been achieved, but also, according to the admission of the Western authorities and the American media, a strategic defeat has been imposed on the aggressors.

Ambassador Arjan of the International Group: From the beginning of the military aggression of the United States and the Zionist regime against Iran, not only the stated goals of this operation were not achieved, but also, according to the acknowledgment of the Western authorities and the American media, a strategic stalemate and field and political defeats were imposed on the aggressors. This war, which started with widespread attacks and killing of civilians, including innocent students, quickly gained wide human, security and economic dimensions and provoked different reactions in the international media.

The world's media, each with their own approaches, have tried to shape the narrative of this war; Examining these reflections can provide a clearer picture of the true state of the war and its prospects.

In an article in The Nation, David Faris argues that the US war against Iran has not only failed to achieve Donald Trump's declared goals, but has led to the escalation of instability in the Persian Gulf and the revelation of Saudi Arabia's security vulnerability. The author considers Yemen attacks against Aramco facilities in Dhahran and King Khalid International Airport in Riyadh, as well as an attack by a militia group based in Iraq on the Saudi oil pipeline, as signs of expanding the consequences of the war.

According to Faris, Saudi Arabia, which was in a relatively powerful position a year ago and was trying to take advantage of its proximity to the Trump administration to advance its regional goals, is now facing a serious crisis in its security and development strategy. He also points to America's critical munitions shortage, which he says has apparently left Washington's regional allies vulnerable to missile and drone strikes.

The article emphasizes that Yemen acts independently from Iran; However, the author believes that the interests of Yemenis have aligned with Iran's efforts to weaken the security position of the United States in the Persian Gulf. According to his analysis, the continuation of the attacks can increase the economic and political pressure on the Trump administration and at the same time advance the goals of Yemen.

Faris sees this situation as a sign of weakening the image of American military superiority and believes that the Arab countries of the Persian Gulf are now facing a difficult choice: continue to rely on Washington or consider some kind of understanding with Tehran. He predicts that even if the war ends, it will not be easy for these countries to return to the previous security arrangements.

The author also considers the American strategy to weaken Iran through naval blockade and sanctions as a continuation of a policy that has failed to achieve regime change in Iran over the past decades. By comparing the current war with the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, he warns that military intervention can create consequences beyond the initial calculations of its designers and provide the resulting security vacuum to other actors.

In conclusion, the article introduces the war against Iran as a factor for increasing regional insecurity, weakening the credibility of the United States and making the security calculations of the Persian Gulf countries more complicated.

In an article on October 15, 2026, the American Institute "Taxpayers for Common Sense" examined the direct and indirect costs of the war with Iran and asked the American Congress to stop the process of financing the war by limiting the budget of the Pentagon.

According to this article, the Pentagon has estimated the cost of the war by September 3rd at 45.1 billion dollars; A figure that shows a significant increase compared to the estimate of $38.1 billion by the Congressional Budget Office as of August 1. The author says that these figures do not include the damage caused to US military facilities in the region. Indirect costs also include the increase in interest on the national debt, inflation, future expenses related to veterans' benefits, and the increase in the cost of fuel, food, and household borrowing. According to the analysis the article cites, the additional cost of the war for each American household has so far reached about $2,000.

The article also considers the reduction of US ammunition reserves as a threat to the country's deterrent power in other regions of the world and warns that it will take years to rebuild the reserves. From the author's point of view, the re-expansion of conflicts between Saudi Arabia and Yemen's Houthis can also impose more costs on America; Especially if the current defensive support is converted into direct participation in offensive operations.

In the final section, the author argues that Congress has so far failed to secure an end to war through war powers. Hence, it suggests that lawmakers oppose excessively high defense budgets, block the creation of new funding sources for military operations with limited oversight, and push for Pentagon spending cuts.

An exclusive CBS News report says that General Randy George, the then Chief of Staff of the US Army, warned of a severe shortage of missile defense ammunition in December 2025, two months before the start of the war with Iran. According to his assessment, which was included in the Pentagon's global force allocation plan, stockpiles of Patriot interceptor missiles and the THAAD system will remain at a low level until 2030. George was removed from office in April 2026 as the war continued.

According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), before the war, the US had about 2,300 Patriot interceptors and 355 THAAD interceptors. During the war, between 1,050 and 1,430 Patriot interceptors and 190 to 290 THAAD interceptors have been used; Figures that can respectively be equivalent to the consumption of 61 and 82 percent of the pre-war reserves. The delivery time for the new orders is also long: about three and a half years for the PAC-3 interceptors and four years and five months for the .

The report emphasizes that this shortage is not only related to the war with Iran. The transfer of weapons to Ukraine, the use of interceptors to defend Israel, the reduction of the production capacity of the defense industry, and the Pentagon's decades-long decisions to prioritize some large military equipment have been factors in the accumulation of this problem. After the Cold War, the United States reduced its capacity for rapid and mass production of munitions, and corporate mergers reduced the number of major aerospace and defense contractors from 51 to five.

A U.S. official told CBS News that even if most of the munitions were stopped in the current conflict, it could take until 2030 to restore stockpiles to pre-war lows.

According to Reuters, the International Monetary Fund has warned that the continuation of the Middle East war and possible further disruptions in energy production, shipping routes and critical infrastructure are the biggest threats facing the economies of the Middle East and Central Asia. The director of the Middle East and Central Asia department of this institution has emphasized that the economic effects of the war are not the same throughout the region, and the countries that are directly involved in its consequences are facing more pressure.

According to the fund's forecast, the economy of the Middle East, North Africa and Pakistan region will shrink by 1.3% in 2026; Meanwhile, the growth of this region was 3.3% last year. The fund forecasts 6.6 percent growth for 2027, but its realization depends on trade and shipping returning to normal in the first quarter of the year, a gradual recovery of exports by mid-year, and continued higher oil prices.

He said that economic surpluses before the war, alternative routes of energy transfer, adjustment of demand and withdrawal of reserves have been able to contain part of the shock caused by the US and Israeli attacks on Iran and the closing of the Strait of Hormuz. However, these protective capacities are limited, and the reduction of reserves and the narrowing of excess capacity can turn new disruptions into more severe price increases.

The IMF has warned that even if economic growth improves in 2027, the effects of the war will remain on infrastructure and various sectors of the economy, increasing the cost of reconstruction. Output from oil-exporting countries directly affected by the war is also expected to remain below pre-war medium-term projections, despite a recovery in growth in 2027.

In a report titled "The global economy is faltering and a storm is coming", the website of the Russian Arab Art network wrote, referring to the war between the United States and the Zionist regime against Iran and the closing of the Strait of Hormuz, that the energy shock caused by this war has made the world economy face the risk of increasing inflation, reducing economic growth and intensifying the debt crisis.

According to this report, the resilience of the global economy has been maintained so far with the help of oil reserves, extensive investment in artificial intelligence and the export of cheap goods from China, but the reduction of energy reserves and the continuation of conflicts in the Middle East can change this situation.

Criticizing the austerity policies of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, this report emphasized that the weakness of multilateral cooperation and the expansion of trade protectionism have limited the ability of governments to deal with economic crises.

According to this analysis, if the war in the Middle East does not end quickly and the price of oil does not decrease, the global economy will face a long period of instability and inflationary pressures.

Ambassador Arjan Chin wrote in a report titled "Amid the rising tension between Saudi Arabia and the Yemeni forces, regional and international actors balance their interests and the risk of escalation of the conflict" that the increase in missile and drone attacks on Saudi Arabia has led regional and international actors to adopt different approaches to influence the crisis, without directly entering into a wider war.

Referring to Iran's mediation proposal, this report stated that Abbas Araghchi, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, has announced Tehran's readiness to help start a dialogue between Saudi Arabia and Yemen and facilitate the achievement of a political solution.

According to Xinhua, analysts believe that the Yemeni forces have an independent political and military agenda, and their decisions are not just subject to Tehran's will; However, Iran can use its influence to strengthen its diplomatic role and avoid direct confrontation.

Xinhua also referred to Haaretz newspaper's report about the request of the Zionist regime to participate in military operations against the Yemeni forces and wrote that Mohammed bin Salman, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, has opposed this proposal. Riyadh still considers the resolution of the Palestinian issue as a condition for the normalization of relations with Tel Aviv.

This report also examined the Makkah defense agreement and the support of Turkey and Pakistan to Saudi Arabia, and wrote that these supports can be mainly focused on strengthening the air and missile defense capabilities, without necessarily leading to extensive participation in the war. Meanwhile, the US is trying to avoid getting caught up in another long-term conflict in the region while supporting Saudi Arabia and curbing the consequences of tensions on the energy market.