A NEW AXIS OF ATTACK EMERGES

Global Affairs Session 69 29 July 2026

A NEW AXIS OF ATTACK EMERGES

Ukraine, the United States and Israel converge against Iran without a formal military alliance

The wars involving Iran and Ukraine are beginning to intersect. Washington is fighting Iran while supporting Kyiv, Israel seeks sustained pressure on Tehran, and Ukraine is striking the Iran–Russia logistics network that supports Moscow’s war. The Caspian Sea has consequently become a strategic bridge between the two conflicts.

Global Affairs Session 69: A new axis of attack emerges

War zone expands

Ukraine, the United States and Israel are not yet part of a formally declared military axis against Iran, but their strategic interests are converging. President Donald Trump met Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Benjamin Netanyahu separately on 28 July.

Washington is fighting Iran while supporting Kyiv. Israel wants pressure maintained on Tehran, while Ukraine is attacking the Iran–Russia logistics network that supports Moscow’s war. The Caspian Sea has therefore become the bridge between the two theatres.

Map connecting Europe, Russia, the Middle East and South Asia
Map showing Europe, the Caspian Sea, Iran and surrounding regions
Map of Iran’s maritime and overland evacuation routes
A converging axis with one shared target and the Caspian Sea linking two wars

How Iran shocked everyone

Iran absorbed an enormous opening assault and continued fighting. The United States–Israel campaign began on 28 February, yet Tehran had not broken after five months of conflict.

  • It absorbed the opening assault: Iran survived sustained attacks and retained the ability to retaliate.
  • It retaliated across a much wider region: Iranian missiles and drones were directed not only towards Israel but also towards United States-linked facilities and bases in Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and Jordan.
  • It weaponised the Strait of Hormuz: By threatening, stopping or selectively permitting ships, Tehran demonstrated that it could impose economic pain without conventionally defeating the United States Navy.
  • It inflicted American casualties: These attacks challenged the assumption that overwhelming American air power could prevent meaningful Iranian retaliation.
  • It widened the conflict through aligned groups: Iran-linked forces in Iraq intensified attacks, while the Houthis threatened Saudi Arabia and shipping around the Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb.

Iran’s central strategy is endurance: survive, retaliate, raise global costs and wait for the opposing coalition to fracture.

Iran’s endurance strategy: survive, retaliate and raise the cost

The Ukraine–Russia war

The full-scale war is approaching four and a half years. Neither side has obtained a decisive political victory, although the battlefield, weapons and geographical reach have changed substantially.

  • A drone-controlled battlefield: Surveillance drones, first-person-view attack drones, electronic warfare and precision munitions have created a vast kill zone in which large troop movements are extremely dangerous. Soldiers increasingly operate in small, dispersed groups.
  • Attacks on Russia’s war economy: Ukraine has expanded long-range strikes against refineries, fuel facilities, military industries, warehouses and maritime logistics to reduce the resources available to Moscow.
  • Russia retains major escalation capacity: Moscow continues launching ballistic missiles, drones and guided bombs against Ukrainian cities and infrastructure.
  • Competing international coalitions: Iran has supported Russia’s drone capabilities, North Korea has provided military assistance, and Ukraine has depended on Western weapons, intelligence and financing.
  • The two wars are becoming connected: Zelenskyy has accused Russia of supplying Iran with satellite imagery of United States and Gulf military facilities, directly linking the European and Middle Eastern conflicts.
How the Ukraine war became a global coalition conflict

Ukraine joins hands with the United States and Israel

28 July did not produce a formal three-leader summit. Trump held a closed meeting with Zelenskyy and subsequently met Netanyahu separately. The Ukrainian and Israeli leaders were simultaneously in Washington for Senator Lindsey Graham’s funeral, creating strong political symbolism.

  • Ukraine’s air-defence request: Kyiv sought a United States decision licensing Ukraine to produce Patriot interceptors locally, because ballistic missiles remain among the most difficult threats for Ukrainian forces to defeat.
  • Economic pressure: Zelenskyy addressed more than 60 senators and supported legislation imposing sanctions and tariffs on states and companies assisting Russia and Iran.
  • Iran remained central: Trump and Netanyahu concentrated on preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, although the future extent of American involvement remained unclear.
  • No announced bilateral agreement: Zelenskyy and Netanyahu had visible contact, but no substantive agreement was announced. Their simultaneous presence was itself strategically important.
  • A functional alignment: Ukraine contributes experience against Iranian-designed drones and the capacity to strike Iran–Russia logistics. Israel contributes intelligence and military focus on Iran, while the United States supplies weapons, sanctions, naval power and political coordination.

This could become a practical alignment even without a formal treaty.

Washington moment linking Ukraine, Israel and the United States

A new axis of attack emerges

The Caspian Sea has become the point where the two wars intersect. Ukraine has reported attacks on vessels believed to be involved in transporting military cargo between Russia and Iran.

  • Kyiv’s legal and strategic argument: Ukraine rejects the claim that it has merely joined America’s Gulf war. It presents the operations as legitimate defence against supply chains supporting Russia’s invasion.
  • The operational target: Cargo can move from Iranian Caspian ports towards Astrakhan, Olya and other Russian facilities before continuing through the Volga, rail and road networks. This system is part of the wider International North–South Transport Corridor.
  • The Caspian is no longer a sanctuary: Ukrainian long-range drones and covert partnerships have enabled attacks on vessels, energy infrastructure and military assets far from the principal front.
  • Indirect gains for Washington and Israel: Disrupting Iran–Russia military trade can weaken Russian capabilities in Ukraine while restricting Tehran’s access to Russian technology, intelligence and equipment.
  • Iran faces a difficult choice: Ignoring the attacks makes the corridor increasingly vulnerable. Retaliating against Ukraine could formally merge the two conflicts and invite deeper Ukrainian, American or Israeli cooperation.
Caspian Sea where the Ukraine and Iran wars intersect

War’s footprints and implications

  • A direct Iran–Ukraine exchange: Iran could use missiles, drones, cyberattacks, sabotage or aligned groups against Ukrainian interests.
  • A self-reinforcing Russia–Iran cycle: Russia could provide improved satellite intelligence, electronic warfare, air-defence equipment or military technology. Iran could respond by supplying Moscow with additional drones, missiles and components.
  • An operational coalition: The United States, Israel and Ukraine could share more intelligence, drone-defence knowledge, targeting information and supply-chain data. Iran, Russia and their partners could then interpret separate actions as one coordinated campaign.
  • Simultaneous maritime disruption: Hormuz affects Gulf energy, Bab el-Mandeb affects Red Sea and Suez traffic, and the Caspian–Black Sea network affects Russian, Iranian, Central Asian and Ukrainian trade.
  • Global economic consequences: Concurrent disruption would increase oil prices, freight charges, insurance costs and food-security pressures.
  • Escalation without a political exit: Further attacks on nuclear installations, leadership targets, ports, power systems or major cities could produce extreme retaliation, nuclear-breakout fears or state fragmentation.
Global impact of simultaneous disruption across Hormuz, Bab el-Mandeb and the Caspian network

Iran’s evacuation routes

“Evacuation routes” refers to the channels Iran can use to reroute oil, weapons components, industrial material and other strategic cargo when a principal route is threatened.

  • Through the Strait of Hormuz: This remains Iran’s most important high-volume maritime route, particularly for oil moving from Persian Gulf terminals towards Asian markets.
  • Through Chabahar and Jask: These ports lie east of Hormuz and provide access to the Gulf of Oman and Indian Ocean. Chabahar can handle selected cargo without entering the strait, while Jask is connected to an oil pipeline.
  • Through the longer maritime route to China: Ships cross the Gulf of Oman, Arabian Sea and Indian Ocean before reaching East Asia, usually through the Strait of Malacca. Sanctioned oil may be stored offshore, transferred between ships or relabelled through intermediary networks.
  • Through the Caspian Sea to Russia: Cargo can travel north from Iranian ports such as Bandar Anzali or Amirabad to Russian Caspian ports and then enter Volga, rail and road systems. Ukrainian drone attacks have made this corridor riskier.
  • Through overland corridors: Selected goods can move through Turkey, Iraq, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, Armenia and Central Asian connections, although these routes are slower.

No alternative can fully replace Hormuz. Iran’s practical strategy is diversification: keeping several smaller routes active so that no single blockade can completely isolate it.

Iran’s strategic evacuation routes through Hormuz, alternative ports, China, Russia and overland corridors

A dangerous convergence without a formal alliance

The emerging alignment is not yet a declared military axis. Nevertheless, the combination of American military power, Israeli intelligence and focus on Iran, and Ukrainian experience against Iranian systems could generate coordinated effects. The Caspian logistics bridge is the most immediate point at which the European and Middle Eastern wars can merge.

The principal danger is that each actor may continue treating its actions as limited and defensive while opponents interpret them as parts of one integrated offensive. That perception gap increases the risk of retaliation, miscalculation and escalation across several regions at once.

Converging United States, Israeli and Ukrainian interests against Iran
Value addition

Glossary and related terms

Functional alignment
Cooperation that produces coordinated strategic effects without a formal alliance treaty or unified command.
Caspian logistics bridge
The network of ports, vessels, waterways, railways and roads connecting Iranian and Russian trade and military supply systems across the Caspian region.
International North–South Transport Corridor
A multimodal transport network connecting the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf with Iran, the Caspian region, Russia and northern markets.
Drone-controlled kill zone
A battlefield area continuously observed and threatened by surveillance and attack drones, making concentrated movement highly dangerous.
Patriot interceptor
A missile used by the Patriot air- and missile-defence system to engage aircraft, cruise missiles and some ballistic-missile threats.
Strategic chokepoint
A narrow maritime or land passage whose disruption can have effects far beyond its immediate location.
Bab el-Mandeb
The narrow strait linking the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden and a major route for shipping using the Suez Canal.
Maritime interdiction
Actions intended to stop, inspect, divert or disable vessels suspected of carrying prohibited or strategically important cargo.
Economic warfare
The use of sanctions, tariffs, trade restrictions, financial controls or attacks on economic infrastructure to weaken an opponent.
Supply-chain targeting
Military, intelligence or economic action aimed at disrupting the movement of weapons, fuel, components, information or other essential resources.
Escalation cycle
A sequence in which each side’s response produces pressure for a stronger counter-response by the opponent.
Nuclear breakout
A situation in which a state moves rapidly towards producing enough weapons-grade material for a nuclear weapon.
Ship-to-ship transfer
The movement of cargo between vessels at sea, sometimes used to obscure the origin, destination or ownership of sanctioned commodities.
Route diversification
Maintaining multiple transport channels so that disruption of one corridor does not completely stop strategic trade or supply.
Value addition

Conceptual references

  • Strategic analysis of functional alignments and informal coalitions.
  • Maritime geography of the Strait of Hormuz, Bab el-Mandeb, the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea region.
  • The International North–South Transport Corridor and Iran–Russia logistics.
  • Drone warfare, electronic warfare and long-range supply-chain targeting in the Ukraine conflict.
  • Sanctions, tariffs, maritime interdiction and other instruments of economic warfare.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

AMERICA VERSUS ALLIES

DEADLY PHASE 2026-30.

CHINA PREPARING FOR WAR?