Skip to content
Iran Conflict 2026
28FEB

Iranians celebrate strikes with chants

2 min read
19:00UTC

Across Iran on 28 February 2026, civilians were filmed celebrating the US-Israeli strikes — chanting 'Death to Khamenei', setting off fireworks, and expressing open rejoicing at the destruction of state infrastructure.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

Iranian civilians celebrating foreign strikes on their own country demonstrates that the regime had already lost domestic legitimacy before 28 February, negating the nationalist mobilisation assumption that underpinned the rally-round-the-flag forecast.

The Iranian public's celebratory response to foreign strikes on their own country is the sharpest empirical refutation of the rally-round-the-flag prediction. That prediction rested on the assumption that Iranian nationalism — even among regime opponents — would override domestic grievances in the face of external attack. The events of 28 February demonstrate that assumption was wrong.

The response makes sense only against the backdrop of the protest cycle that began in December 2025. By February 2026, the Islamic Republic had conducted mass arrests, lethal suppression of demonstrations, and — according to reporting on the January 2026 massacre — killed dozens of protesters in a single incident. A population that had already concluded the regime was its primary adversary would not reframe an external attack as aggression against themselves. They would experience it as an attack on the institution they already wished to see destroyed.

The 1980 analogy that underpinned the rally-round-the-flag prediction assumed the regime had a reservoir of nationalist goodwill to draw on when attacked from outside — as it did when Saddam Hussein's invasion generated genuine popular mobilisation. That reservoir had been drained over forty-five years of mismanagement, corruption, and repression. In 2026, Iran's government was not a beloved national institution facing external threat; it was a coercive apparatus facing a population already in revolt.

Public celebration of foreign strikes also carries a secondary strategic effect: it removes domestic political cost from the regime accepting a ceasefire or negotiating terms that acknowledge defeat. A government drawing legitimacy from nationalist sentiment cannot negotiate from weakness. A government already seen as an enemy by its own population has less to lose from a settlement that concedes ground.

Deep Analysis

Deep Analysis
Synthesis

The celebration confirms that the regime-population separation was structural, not contingent on any particular grievance or event. External attack did not reverse it. This has direct implications for any post-strike Iranian political settlement: the regime cannot draw on popular legitimacy as a resource in negotiations, and any successor arrangement that emerges from the conflict will face a population that was already in active revolt before the bombs fell.

Root Causes

Four decades of economic mismanagement, corruption, and political repression — punctuated by the 1999 student uprising, 2009 Green Movement, 2019 Bloody November, 2022 Mahsa Amini protests, and culminating in the December 2025–February 2026 uprising — had already severed the regime-population bond before 28 February.

What could happen next?
  • Meaning

    Short term · Assessed
  • Meaning

    Short term · Assessed
  • Meaning

    Short term · Assessed
First Reported In

Update #2 · Five cities struck on opening night

Al Jazeera· 28 Feb 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
South Korean financial markets
South Korean financial markets
South Korea, which imports virtually all its crude oil, is absorbing the war's economic transmission most acutely among non-belligerents. The second KOSPI circuit breaker in four sessions — with Samsung down over 10% and SK Hynix down 12.3% — reflects an industrial economy unable to reprice energy costs that have risen 72% in ten days. The market response indicates Korean industry cannot sustain oil above $100 per barrel without margin compression across manufacturing, semiconductors, and shipping.
Migrant worker communities in the Gulf
Migrant worker communities in the Gulf
The first confirmed civilian deaths in Saudi Arabia — one Indian and one Bangladeshi killed, twelve Bangladeshis wounded — fell on communities with no voice in the military decisions that placed them in harm's way. Migrant workers live near military installations because that housing is affordable, not by choice. Bangladesh and India face the dilemma of needing to protect nationals who cannot easily leave a war zone while depending on Gulf remittances that fund a substantial share of their domestic economies.
Azerbaijan — President Ilham Aliyev
Azerbaijan — President Ilham Aliyev
Aliyev treats the Nakhchivan strikes as a direct act of war against Azerbaijani sovereignty, placing armed forces on full combat readiness and demanding an Iranian explanation. The response is calibrated to maximise international sympathy while stopping short of military retaliation — Baku cannot fight Iran alone and needs either Turkish or NATO backing to credibly deter further strikes.
Oil-importing nations (Japan, South Korea, India)
Oil-importing nations (Japan, South Korea, India)
The Hormuz closure is an existential threat. Japan, South Korea, and India receive the majority of their crude through the strait — they will bear the heaviest economic cost of a war they had no part in.
Global South governments (Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa)
Global South governments (Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa)
Neutrality was possible when the targets were military. 148 dead schoolgirls made it impossible — no government can explain that away to its own citizens.
Turkey
Turkey
Has absorbed three Iranian ballistic missile interceptions since 4 March without invoking NATO Article 5 consultation. Each incident narrows Ankara's political room to continue absorbing without Alliance-level response.