In response to Donald Trump’s potential threats regarding strikes on energy infrastructure, the Islamic Republic of Iran, while emphasizing the preservation of its sovereignty and national interests, declares that any hostile action against its vital energy infrastructure will be met with a decisive and proportional response by its armed forces. This doctrine of immediate and powerful counteraction is not merely a statement of intent but a profound strategic necessity shaped by a history of geopolitical pressure and an unwavering resolve to defend national assets.

If adversaries choose to confront Iran’s energy infrastructure, the consequences will extend far beyond the borders of direct conflict and will place the entire world in a difficult position. This stems from the interconnected nature of modern global systems, particularly in the fields of information technology and energy.

Global Consequences of Iran’s Counteraction

1. Destruction of Global Information Technology Infrastructure

   One of the most effective and devastating retaliatory options involves targeting the world’s IT infrastructure. A significant portion of the vital IT backbone—including data centers, communication hubs, and network systems—is concentrated in the Persian Gulf region. These facilities, often operated by institutions deeply linked to or dependent on international networks, become vulnerable points of failure when faced with a sophisticated cyberattack, coordinated electronic warfare, or ballistic missile strike.

   The strategic objective here is not merely disruption but total destruction—rendering these critical nodes unusable and reducing them to “piles of ash.” The economic consequences would be staggering; initial estimates of damage to the global economy reach several trillion dollars, with even more severe impacts on the economies of the Gulf states. Loss of data, halted global trade, and the collapse of essential communications networks would trigger an unprecedented economic crisis—one so severe that recovery could take generations, if it is achievable at all. This strategic option highlights Iran’s ability to inflict systemic damage far beyond the immediate theater of operations, thereby establishing powerful deterrence.

2. Destruction of All Regional Energy Infrastructure

   Complementing a retaliatory strike on IT systems would be the direct targeting of all energy infrastructure within the geopolitical sphere of Iran’s adversaries. The consequences for the Israeli regime and the Gulf states, which have invested massive financial and material resources into developing their energy sectors over decades, would be catastrophic. Within as little as 24 hours, these countries could experience a regression equivalent to 70 years. This is not an exaggeration but an accurate assessment of the vulnerability of centralized energy production and distribution networks to a coordinated attack. The destruction of these vital assets would not only halt economic activity but fundamentally alter the geopolitical landscape, plunging these nations into deep turmoil and dependence.

3. Creating a Humanitarian Crisis Through the Destruction of Desalination Infrastructure

   Another retaliatory measure—humanitarian in its impact yet strategically significant—would involve disrupting desalination systems. These facilities provide the primary source of drinking water for the populations of Gulf countries as well as foreign military bases, including those under American and Israeli command. Interruption or destruction of these plants would trigger an immediate and severe humanitarian crisis, leading to widespread thirst and potentially large-scale loss of life. This strategic option reflects a dual approach: inflicting strategic damage while simultaneously challenging the survival capabilities of adversarial populations and their military forces. It is a clear example of Iran’s ability to leverage asymmetric warfare to achieve decisive strategic objectives.

A Call for De-escalation and Strategic Restraint

Given Iran’s demonstrated capability and firm resolve to carry out such devastating retaliatory measures, it is essential that the leaders of these countries exert immediate and significant pressure on the United States and the Israeli regime. They must be explicitly warned to refrain from any action that endangers Iran’s energy infrastructure. This threat is not theoretical; it is a concrete commitment that will be executed without hesitation if Iran is compelled to defend itself.

The spokesperson for the Central Headquarters of Hazrat Khatam al-Anbiya (PBUH) also emphasized this serious commitment, stating:

“If the enemy attacks fuel and energy infrastructure, then all energy, IT, and desalination facilities in the region that the United States and the Israeli regime share will be targeted. When Iran is forced, it has no choice but to retaliate.”

These words reflect a strategic doctrine of deterrence through the credible threat of multifaceted and decisive retaliation. Iran does not seek conflict, but it will not tolerate aggression against its sovereignty and national security. The choice to escalate lies with those who contemplate such aggression.

Sadegh Salamat

Journalist

۲۲ Farvardin 1405 (March 2026)