After the first meeting in Oman this month, about which very little is known, the Iranian Foreign Ministry, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Rafael Grossi are meeting in Geneva on February 17.

The Omani meeting ended badly as it was immediately followed by the downing of an Iranian drone and military threats from the American side.

This time round the chances of an agreement look equally slim, mainly because if Iran gives up its 440 kg of uranium enriched to 60%, complying with an agreement with the two countries that attacked it, Iran could appear to be in a state of surrender at a time when the government has already been weakened by last month’s mass demonstrations that left tens of thousands dead.

The uranium stock is the key issue. Enriched to 60% is not quite weapons grade level, but the last step is relatively short. Iran already has at least four models of dual-capable missiles and could be weeks away from a nuclear weapon.

I don't believe that after running the nuclear programme for decades, the Persians would abandon their nuclear program now. But the US demands go well beyond the enrichment programme to include the cancellation of support for militias throughout the region as well as a 300 km limit on missiles. Accepting such strict conditions would create the perfect atmosphere for the government to be truly deposed.

So, what happens if the Genera talks fail?

Dozens of US military cargo planes have transported equipment from the US to Jordan, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia in recent weeks, and now the Americans have moved the second Carrier Strike Group (CSG) near Oman, totalling what I calculate to be around 2,000 Vertical Launch System (VLS) cells, since I consider at least four submarines in that group. Of that number, about 50-70% would be anti-aircraft missiles, leaving around 600-1,000 cells for Tomahawks.

That sounds like a lot of missiles but for a country the size of Iran it is insufficient. These missiles are fired in multiple units, and depending on the target, several dozen. To give an idea, in 2025 Russia launched 1,900 missiles against Ukraine, and while the Russian missiles do significant damage, most of the territory is unaffected and it still has active military installations. Also consider that Iran is almost three times larger than Ukraine. Despite its awesome military power, the US will not have a quick or easy war against a country of 90mn inhabitants.

Given this situation, the Americans would have to resort to air bases in allied countries in the Gulf to carry out supplementary airstrikes, since to stay out of range of Iran’s formidable arsenal of anti-ship missiles, the aircraft carrier would have to remain more than 1,500 km from the Iranian coast. That puts both the US’ F-35Cs and F-18E/Fs out of attack range, unless they risk refuelling over contested territory, which I think is highly unlikely. The F-18, which makes up the vast majority of aircraft on American carriers, has less than 800 km of combat range, which practically makes carrier operations unfeasible against a nation with as many anti-ship missiles as Iran.

But how to operate bases so close to Iran in a war scenario? For this reason, the Americans have already evacuated the Gulf bases.

All of them are within range of Iranian Short-Range Ballistic Missile (SRBM) missiles like the Fateh variants and other older models from the Shahab family. Iran has these SRBMs in the thousands, having even exported a few hundred to Russia between 2024/25.

In a war scenario, there is the possibility of Iranian missiles missing their targets and hitting inhabited regions of the countries that host American bases. This could occur due to jamming, spoofing, or an act fabricated by intelligence, even as a false flag to generate popular support.

And it is at that moment the countries that host US bases will be compelled to take action, under great pressure from the US, possibly sparking a wider regional conflagration.

The countries that host American bases in the region operate more than 600 combat aircraft and tens of thousands of armoured vehicles, with a naval force of nearly 400 ships, but not as equipped with missiles as Iranian vessels. In this landscape, Saudi Arabia's aviation and the UAE's drones stand out. Both countries have an infant defence industry, but one that is growing rapidly. However, these industries are still immature to materially affect the outcome of a regional war.

When a nation decides to accept foreign military bases on its territory, it is already creating ties and giving up some of its sovereignty. Some countries already have long-standing divergences with Iran, either due to religious issues or because of the financing of militias in their own backyards.

As of February 17, 2026, Bahrain has publicly stated its intent to retaliate against Iran if Iranian forces strike American military bases located on Bahraini territory.

Bahrain is a tiny island nation, smaller than New York City, but punches way above its weight strategically as the home base for the US Navy's Fifth Fleet, which is indeed the largest American naval presence in the Middle East.

With events beyond Iran's control, intelligence operations, and good media coverage, Bahrain's discourse could gain adherents as soon as the first missiles fall.

I believe the US is preparing for a conflict lasting weeks, but they could be surprised by a war that ends up lasting months, causing chaos in the region and wider world economy.