World February 28, 2026

Global Response Grows After Israel and U.S. Strike Iran

Leaders around the world react to strikes as U.S. president pledges to dismantle Iran's missile capabilities

By Leila Farooq
Global Response Grows After Israel and U.S. Strike Iran

Israel and the United States carried out strikes on Iran, triggering renewed military confrontation in the Middle East. President Donald Trump pledged to destroy Tehran’s missile arsenal and to block Iranian progress toward a nuclear weapon. International figures issued sharp responses, raising questions about diplomacy, legality and regional stability.

Key Points

  • Israel and the United States launched strikes on Iran, triggering renewed military confrontation in the Middle East.
  • President Donald Trump vowed to destroy Tehran’s missile arsenal and to stop it from developing a nuclear weapon.
  • International reactions highlight legal and diplomatic disputes; defense, energy and financial markets may be affected by increased geopolitical risk.

Feb 28 - Israel and the United States launched strikes on Iran on Saturday, an action that has escalated tensions across the Middle East and prompted widespread international comment. President Donald Trump publicly vowed to destroy Tehran’s missile arsenal and to prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon.

The strikes were described by officials in Israel and the United States as decisive military moves. The attacks have also sparked immediate and pointed reactions from foreign leaders and senior officials, reflecting a mix of skepticism, condemnation and concern over future fallout.

Reacting from Moscow, Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council and a former Russian president, criticized the approach to negotiations with Iran. He said:

"The peacemaker once again showed his face," Medvedev, a former Russian president, said. "All negotiations with Iran are a cover operation. No one doubted it. No one really wanted to negotiate anything."

Medvedev added a historical comparison in his remarks, noting the relative youth of the United States compared with the longevity of Persian history and concluding with a rhetorical challenge: "The question is who has more patience to wait for the inglorious end of their enemy. The USA is only 249 years old. The Persian Empire was founded more than 2,500 years ago. Let’s see in 100 years..."

In Beirut, Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam issued a warning about the potential domestic consequences of the strikes, stating:

"I reiterate that we will not accept anyone dragging the country into adventures that threaten its security and unity."

Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide challenged the legal rationale offered for the strikes. His assessment emphasized international law, saying:

"The attack is described by Israel as a preventive strike, but it is not in line with international law. Preventive attacks require an immediately imminent threat."

Officials and leaders quoted here underscore the diplomatic and legal tensions that have followed the strikes. The statements reflect differing perspectives on the legitimacy of pre-emptive military action, the state of negotiations with Iran, and the risks of broader regional destabilization.

At present, public comments from key figures signal heightened uncertainty over next steps in the region. The immediate international discourse centers on the legality of preventive strikes, the durability of diplomatic channels, and the potential for further escalation.


Key points

  • Israel and the United States conducted strikes on Iran, prompting a renewed military confrontation in the Middle East.
  • President Donald Trump vowed to destroy Tehran’s missile arsenal and to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
  • International responses raise legal and diplomatic questions; sectors likely affected include defense contractors, energy markets and regional trade given heightened geopolitical risk.

Risks and uncertainties

  • Risk of regional escalation and further military confrontation, affecting security-related industries and market volatility.
  • Concerns over the legality of preventive strikes, as voiced by Norway's foreign minister, which could complicate diplomatic avenues and international responses.
  • Potential diplomatic breakdown or erosion of trust in negotiations, reflected in comments by Dmitry Medvedev, creating uncertainty for political and economic engagement in the region.

Risks

  • Potential for regional escalation and further military conflict, which could impact defense suppliers and market stability.
  • Disputed legality of preventive strikes under international law, as noted by Norway's foreign minister, raising diplomatic and legal uncertainty.
  • Erosion of trust in diplomatic negotiations with Iran, suggested by Dmitry Medvedev's comments, creating longer-term geopolitical uncertainty.

More from World

Strike by U.S. and Israel Sparks Widespread Fear and Flight Across Iran Feb 28, 2026 Airlines Suspend Middle East Services After US and Israeli Strikes on Iran Feb 28, 2026 Where U.S. Forces Are Positioned in the Middle East as Conflict Reignites Feb 28, 2026 US and Israel Carry Out Strikes in Iran; Explosions Reported Across Multiple Cities Feb 28, 2026 OPEC+ Weighs Major Supply Boost After Israeli Strike on Tehran Feb 28, 2026