Geopolitical Risk Assessment: Hegemonic Persistence, the Iranian Decapitation Crisis, and the Strategic Calculus of Operation Epic Fury

The current global security environment, as of March 3, 2026, is defined by the most significant application of unilateral force in the 21st century. The execution of Operation Epic Fury by the United States and Operation Roaring Lion by Israel has not only eliminated the senior leadership of the Islamic Republic of Iran but has also fundamentally challenged the post-World War II international order.1 This report analyzes the historical trajectory of United States hegemonic efforts, the resulting cycles of blowback, and the specific evolution of U.S.-Iran relations leading to the present crisis. By examining the current transition of power in Tehran through the lens of historical precedence, strategic "Hail Mary" maneuvers, and advanced artificial intelligence game theory modeling, a comprehensive understanding of the risks and potential outcomes can be established.3

The Evolution of U.S. Global Hegemony: From Multilateralism to the Trump Corollary

The historical emergence of the United States as a global hegemon was a process of transition rather than a sudden seizure of power. Following the battle of Waterloo in 1815, Great Britain maintained a global hegemony that lasted until the end of World War I in 1918.6 The period between 1918 and 1945 served as a "no man's land" in international relations, where the United Kingdom was too weak to impose its will, and the United States, while possessing the requisite economic power, remained reluctant to lead.6 It was only the cataclysm of World War II that forced the United States to abandon its isolationist tendencies and assume the role of the undisputed global superpower.7

The Architecture of Post-War Dominance

The post-1945 order was built on a dual foundation of military supremacy and institutional legitimacy. The United States emerged from the war with its industrial base intact, a booming war economy, and a temporary monopoly on nuclear weapons.7 To legitimize this dominance, the U.S. spearheaded the creation of the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank.6 These multilateral institutions were designed to provide a voice for weaker powers, thereby reducing resentment and integrating the "Rest" into a system that fundamentally served American interests.7

At the same time, the U.S. pursued a strategy of "Grand Area" concept, ensuring that no hostile power could dominate the resources of Europe or Asia.9 This led to the creation of NATO and a hub-and-spoke system of bilateral alliances in East Asia.7 During the Cold War, the U.S. operated simultaneously as a hegemonic power toward its developed allies in the OECD and as an imperial power toward the developing world, where it frequently used covert operations and military interventions to suppress revolutionary nationalism and maintain its sphere of influence.6

Hegemonic Transition and Historical Trends

The gradual decline of absolute American power began in the early 1970s. While military supremacy remained, the economic sphere saw the U.S. share of world gross product fall from 50% in 1950 to roughly 21% by the turn of the century.11 The emergence of the euro and the rise of China as a manufacturing titan challenged the dollar's status as the sole global reserve currency.11 By 2026, this decline had prompted a strategic shift toward the "Trump Corollary," a posture that prioritizes direct, high-impact military actions—such as the 2026 interventions in Venezuela and Iran—to achieve rapid regime shifts rather than long-term, institutional state-building.10

Case Studies in Hegemonic Blowback: Mechanisms of Unintended Consequences

The concept of "blowback" refers to the unintended, often violent repercussions of foreign interventions that return to haunt the intervening power. The history of U.S. global strategy is replete with examples where tactical successes in regime change led to long-term strategic failures.8

Latin America: From the Monroe Doctrine to Operation Absolute Resolve

For over two centuries, the United States has viewed Latin America as its "backyard," justified initially by the Monroe Doctrine in 1823 to resist European colonialism.10 This evolved into a century of "Banana Wars" (1898–1935), with U.S. military presences in Cuba, Nicaragua, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic.10 The blowback from these interventions manifested in deep-seated anti-Americanism and the rise of socialist revolutionary movements during the Cold War.9

The current era has seen a return to this interventionist posture. In January 2026, the U.S. launched Operation Absolute Resolve in Venezuela, capturing President Nicolás Maduro.15 While the administration justifies these actions as restoring democracy and ensuring regional stability, critics argue that such maneuvers risk fragmenting the target nations and inviting violent competition among criminal and political factions.14 The 2026 National Security Strategy (NSS) has openly designated Latin America as a sphere of influence, a posture dubbed "Monroe Doctrine 2.0," which has triggered diplomatic resentment across the Global South.14

Vietnam and the Middle East: The Costs of Imperial Overreach

The U.S. involvement in Vietnam (1962–1975) represents the quintessential example of hegemonic overreach. The attempt to protect South Vietnam from communist insurgency ended in a humiliating defeat, with a massive loss of life and the subsequent destabilization of neighboring Cambodia, which suffered a genocide under the Khmer Rouge.9 This failure forced a temporary rethink of U.S. interventionism but did not end the impulse to police the global order.8

In the Middle East, the cycle of intervention and blowback accelerated after the 1991 Gulf War. The establishment of U.S. military bases in the region sowed the seeds of radicalization that culminated in the September 11 attacks.12 The subsequent "War on Terror" and the 2003 invasion of Iraq led to the collapse of the Iraqi state and the rise of regional militancy, including the Islamic State (ISIS).12 These actions were often justified by flawed intelligence, such as the search for non-existent weapons of mass destruction, and resulted in over one million Iraqi deaths and a permanently destabilized region.12

The Crucible of U.S.-Iran Relations: A 70-Year Arc of Conflict

The relationship between the United States and Iran is perhaps the most documented and disastrous sequence of hegemonic intervention and blowback in modern history. The timeline of this relationship is defined by three distinct phases: the era of alliance through intervention (1953–1979), the era of revolutionary hostility (1979–2024), and the current era of decapitation and open conflict (2025–2026).17

Phase I: The 1953 Coup and the Pahlavi Ally

In 1953, the CIA and British intelligence orchestrated the overthrow of Mohammad Mosaddegh, the democratically elected Prime Minister who had nationalized the oil industry.17 This intervention reinstated the Western-friendly monarchy under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.19 For the next twenty-five years, the Shah served as a pillar of U.S. security interests in the Middle East, purchasing billions of dollars in American weaponry and even participating in the "Atoms for Peace" program, which laid the foundation for Iran's nuclear capabilities.17

The blowback from the 1953 coup was profound. While it secured oil interests for a generation, it delegitimized the Shah in the eyes of his people, who viewed him as a "puppet" of the "Great Satan".19 The modernization programs known as the White Revolution and the repressive tactics of the SAVAK (secret police) eventually fueled a broad-based coalition of secularists, Islamists, and leftists that overthrew the regime in 1979.19

Phase II: The Islamic Republic and the Doctrine of Maximum Pressure

The 1979 Revolution and the subsequent hostage crisis (1979–1981) fundamentally altered U.S. foreign policy. The seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran led to the first use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to freeze Iranian assets, a tool that remains the primary weapon of U.S. economic warfare today.22 During the 1980s, the U.S. backed Iraq in its war against Iran, which included providing intelligence and support to Saddam Hussein.12

Tensions fluctuated over the following decades, with periods of engagement (such as the 2015 nuclear deal) followed by sharp escalations. The Trump administration's withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018 and the imposition of a "Maximum Pressure" campaign severely impacted the Iranian economy, causing the rial to plummet and inflation to soar.18 By late 2025, Iran was facing its deepest legitimacy crisis in decades, with nationwide protests over economic malaise and infrastructure failure.23 The regime responded with the "January Massacre" of 2026, where security forces allegedly killed over 36,000 protesters, radicalizing the society and leading some citizens to hope for an American intervention.18

Operation Epic Fury: The 2026 Decapitation Strike

The current conflict began on February 28, 2026, with Operation Epic Fury.18 This operation was the culmination of a months-long military buildup that saw the deployment of two carrier strike groups (USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Gerald R. Ford) to the Middle East.18 The operation was launched following the failure of indirect talks in Istanbul and Geneva, where the U.S. demanded that Iran end all nuclear enrichment and ballistic missile programs as a prerequisite for sanctions relief.24

Tactical Breakdown of the February 28 Strikes

Operation Epic Fury was not a traditional invasion but a "decapitation" strike aimed at the regime's leadership and its security apparatus.18 The strikes were coordinated with Israel’s "Operation Roaring Lion" and utilized a wide array of advanced military technologies.18

1. Decapitation Strikes (06:45 UTC): The Israeli Air Force conducted a wave of strikes on the Pasteur Street district in Tehran, destroying the residential compound of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.18 The strike killed Khamenei, several family members, and over 40 top officials.18
2. Command and Control (07:00–12:00 UTC): U.S. forces utilized B-2 stealth bombers and Tomahawk missiles to strike IRGC command centers, air defenses (including the HQ-9B system around Tehran), and hardened ballistic missile facilities.18
3. Naval Engagement: The U.S. Navy reported the destruction of 17 Iranian naval vessels, effectively limiting the regime's ability to enforce its threatened closure of the Strait of Hormuz.24
4. Technological Integration: For the first time, low-cost "Lucas drones" from Task Force Scorpion Strike were used in mass combat, alongside AI-enabled decision support tools like Anthropic’s Claude, which processed satellite and signals intelligence to identify high-value targets in real-time.3

Key Casualties of the Initial Wave

The scale of the casualties was immense. According to the Iranian Red Crescent, 555 people were killed in the first two days, a number that rose to 787 by March 3.30 Among the most controversial incidents was a missile strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls' school in Minab, which reportedly killed 180 people, an event the Iranian government has used to label the operation a "cynical violation of human morality".18

The Chaos of Succession and CIA Strategic Disruptions

Today, March 3, 2026, marks the fourth day of the conflict. The future of the Islamic Republic hangs in a state of unprecedented uncertainty as the nation attempts to navigate its constitutional succession procedures under fire.1

The Interim Leadership Council and the Constitutional Vacuum

Following the death of Khamenei, power temporarily passed to a three-person leadership council as mandated by Article 111 of the Iranian Constitution.34 This council consists of President Masoud Pezeshkian, Judiciary Chief Gholam-Hossein Mohseni-Ejei, and senior cleric Alireza Arafi.30 However, the council’s legitimacy is being challenged both by domestic unrest and external military action.25

The Assembly of Experts, the body responsible for electing a permanent Supreme Leader, has been targeted in the ongoing strikes. On Tuesday, Israeli officials confirmed a strike on the Assembly of Experts building in Qom while members were purportedly convening to select a successor.35 This suggests that the U.S. and Israeli objective is not just to kill the leader, but to disrupt the very mechanism of orderly transition, forcing a collapse of the regime's institutional architecture.18

The CIA’s Active Role in the Transition

News reports from today indicate that the CIA is actively attempting to use opposition groups to disrupt the transition of power.25 This represents a significant escalation from previous covert operations. The CIA has issued rare Persian-language appeals on social media, providing Iranians with instructions on how to establish secure virtual contact.36

The agency is reportedly collaborating with several domestic and exiled groups:

• The "Lion and Sun" Student Associations: This grassroots movement, adopting pre-1979 symbols, has gathered pace in Tehran, Isfahan, and Mashhad universities, calling for secular governance and territorial integrity.25
• The NCRI and Maryam Rajavi’s Ten-Point Plan: This coalition proposes a republican framework to replace the theocracy, explicitly rejecting a return to hereditary monarchy.37
• Prince Reza Pahlavi: Exiled groups in the U.S. have organized celebrations and called for the return of the Crown Prince to lead a transitional government, though this is met with skepticism by internal democratic advocates.26

The Iranian government has characterized these efforts as "soft warfare" and a "global conspiracy" involving the CIA and Mossad, using the unrest to justify continued violent crackdowns.25 However, the CIA’s goal appears to be the gathering of intelligence on nuclear sites—such as Natanz, which was reportedly hit on March 2—and the identification of potential informants within the security services.18

Strategic Analysis: The "Hail Mary" Assessment

The central question facing policymakers and intelligence analysts is whether the regime change forced by the Ayatollah's death is a "Hail Mary"—a desperate, high-risk play that may lack a viable endgame.

Comparing Past and Present Interventions

A comparison between the 1953 coup and Operation Epic Fury reveals a stark contrast in strategy and risk.

The 1953 intervention was a surgically targeted political operation with a clear (though flawed) successor. In contrast, the 2026 strikes have decapitated the entire top tier of the regime without a credible democratic roadmap or a unified alternative.37 The administration appears to have banked on the "mosaic regime" collapsing once the head was removed, but current indicators suggest that the IRGC is attempting to consolidate power rather than surrender.3

The "Hail Mary" Rationale

The term "Hail Mary" is increasingly used by analysts to describe the Trump administration's strategy.38 The rationale for such a high-stakes gamble includes:

• Existential Urgency: The belief that Iran was on the verge of a nuclear breakout and that only a decisive strike could prevent the development of a nuclear deterrent.18
• Technological Optimism: An overreliance on AI and high-tech weaponry to conduct a "clean" regime change without ground troops.3
• Economic Coercion: The engineered dollar shortage and rial collapse were intended to force the regime into a corner, leaving decapitation as the final move in a "maximum pressure" strategy.1

However, the risk is that the regime, facing an existential threat, will engage in its own "Hail Mary" maneuvers—such as striking Gulf oil infrastructure to drive prices to $200 a barrel, a move that could "save" them by causing a global economic crisis.38

The Limits of Predictability: AI Game Theory and the Fog of War

The 2026 conflict is notable for its integration of AI into both tactical planning and strategic forecasting. Yet, the outcome of the current crisis remains fundamentally unpredictable, even for the most advanced models.

AI Game Theory Findings

Before the strikes, several AI-enabled simulations were conducted to project the behavior of the Iranian leadership and the IRGC inner circle.4

1. IRGC Behavioral Modeling: The Askit platform modeled 122 IRGC commanders based on their life experiences and psychological traits.5 The simulation found that 70% of these commanders favored a military leader as successor, while support for a traditional cleric was non-existent.5 This suggests that the most likely outcome of the "orderly transition" is not a democracy, but a military-led IRGC junta.5
2. Prisoner’s Dilemma Simulations: GPT-4.1-based agents representing U.S. and Iranian leadership were run through 600 iterations of diplomatic negotiations.4 The results consistently converged on "mutual defection," driven by deep-seated distrust and the prioritization of regime survival over compromise.4
3. The "Covert Strategy" Variable: One interesting emergent property in the AI simulations was the tendency for the "Khamenei agent" to adopt a covert strategy—agreeing to terms in character but secretly defecting to pocket concessions.4

The Predictive Modeling Equation

Game theory models typically rely on the Nash Equilibrium, where each player chooses the best response to the other’s actions. In a zero-sum conflict like the current one, the utility  for the United States () and Iran () can be represented as:

Where:

•  = Probability of successful regime change.
•  = Value of removing the nuclear threat.
•  = Cost of blowback (regional war, oil shock).
•  = Probability of regime survival.
•  = Value of remaining in power.
•  = Cost of escalation/annihilation.

The AI models used by CENTCOM and Askit attempt to quantify these variables by processing petabytes of data.3 However, as researchers warn, these models often suffer from "black-box opacity" and "overfitting," failing to account for the moral, human, and contextual factors that define the "fog of war".41 The "symbolic value of a loss" or the irrational behavior of a leader facing certain death cannot be easily reduced to algebraic sums of kinetic events.41

Conclusions and Future Outlook

The assassination of Ali Khamenei and the senior leadership of the Islamic Republic represents the most aggressive application of hegemonic power in the post-WWII era. While Operation Epic Fury achieved its immediate tactical objectives—the decapitation of the regime and the destruction of significant portions of its military infrastructure—the strategic success of this maneuver remains in doubt.3

The current transition of power in Tehran is far from "orderly." The CIA’s attempts to guide this transition via opposition groups are occurring in an environment of active kinetic conflict, an internet blackout, and massive regional retaliation.18 The historical lesson of blowback suggests that the removal of a centralized authority without a credible, indigenous democratic roadmap often leads to more radicalized and reactionary political structures.8

The "Hail Mary" nature of the 2026 strikes is confirmed by the assessment that even the most advanced AI models cannot guarantee a predictable outcome.4 While simulations point toward a likely IRGC military takeover, the chaotic interactions of student protesters, regional proxies, and global energy markets create a level of structural uncertainty that defies algorithmic resolution.5 As the conflict enters its second week, the United States faces the very real possibility that its latest attempt to maintain global hegemony will result in the largest regional war of the 21st century, with consequences that will reverberate for generations.23

Works cited

1. 2026 Iran conflict - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Iran_conflict
2. Iran–United States relations - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93United_States_relations
3. U.S. Strike on Iran: What Operation Epic Fury Means for Markets ..., accessed March 3, 2026, https://investorplace.com/hypergrowthinvesting/2026/03/u-s-strike-on-iran-what-operation-epic-fury-means-for-markets/
4. A Game-Theoretic AI Simulation of Iran-U.S. (Feb 2026)Talks in Geneva | by Artin Yousefi, accessed March 3, 2026, https://medium.com/@ArtinYousefi/a-game-theoretic-ai-simulation-of-iran-u-s-feb-2026-talks-in-geneva-3ff5e07768df
5. The Ayatollah's shadow: Inside the AI model predicting Iran's next ruler - Ynet News, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.ynetnews.com/tech-and-digital/article/h1w00me30011e
6. Hegemony and Empire | Global Policy Journal, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/03/09/2024/hegemony-and-empire
7. How WWII Changed the World | American University, Washington, D.C., accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.american.edu/sis/news/20250902-how-wwii-changed-the-world.cfm
8. Global perspectives reframe timeline and scope of WWII - Cornell Chronicle, accessed March 3, 2026, https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2025/06/global-perspectives-reframe-timeline-and-scope-wwii
9. American imperialism - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_imperialism
10. Foreign interventions by the United States - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_interventions_by_the_United_States
11. U.S. Hegemony: Continuing Decline, Enduring Danger - Monthly Review, accessed March 3, 2026, https://monthlyreview.org/articles/u-s-hegemony-continuing-decline-enduring-danger/
12. America's Longest War - A Brief Timeline of US Military Campaigns in the Middle East, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.palestinechronicle.com/americas-longest-war-a-brief-timeline-of-us-military-campaigns-in-the-middle-east/
13. Hegemony, Unipolarity and American Failure in the Middle East, accessed March 3, 2026, https://pomeps.org/hegemony-unipolarity-and-american-failure-in-the-middle-east
14. GT investigates: Unveiling US' long-standing geopolitical, economic and ideological intrigues in Latin America - Global Times, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202601/1352697.shtml
15. 2026 United States intervention in Venezuela - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_United_States_intervention_in_Venezuela
16. From Regime Change to Regime Management: Washington's Venezuela Strategy - CSIS, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.csis.org/analysis/regime-change-regime-management-washingtons-venezuela-strategy
17. Backgrounder: From ally to adversary -- 70-year spiral in U.S.-Iran relations, accessed March 3, 2026, https://english.news.cn/20260303/39e9f7e2e2704f81bfc445c7858729d0/c.html
18. 2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2026_Israeli%E2%80%93United_States_strikes_on_Iran
19. U.S. Relations With Iran - Council on Foreign Relations, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.cfr.org/timelines/us-relations-iran
20. 7 key points in US-Iran relations since 1953, accessed March 3, 2026, https://laist.com/news/7-key-points-in-us-iran-relations-since-1953
21. 7 key points in U.S.-Iran relations since 1953 | WGCU News | PBS & NPR for Southwest Florida, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.wgcu.org/2026-03-02/7-key-points-in-u-s-iran-relations-since-1953
22. How the Iran hostage crisis shaped the US approach to sanctions | Brookings, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/how-the-iran-hostage-crisis-shaped-the-us-approach-to-sanctions/
23. 2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran - Wikipedia, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactions_to_the_2026_Iran_conflict
24. US-Israel strikes on Iran: February/March 2026 - House of Commons Library, accessed March 3, 2026, https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10521/
25. How Tehran whitewashes its crimes abroad | Iran International, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202602237242
26. Venezuela's Machado Speaks After Meeting Trump Thursday; Source: U.S. Moving Carrier Strike Group To Middle East; Iran Reels From Brutal Crackdown On Anti-Regime Protesters - CNN.com - Transcripts, accessed March 3, 2026, https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/wwkmf/date/2026-01-16/segment/01
27. Iran, US set for Istanbul talks as region scrambles to stave off war, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202602032966
28. CIA intelligence led to strike that killed Khamenei in Iran, source ..., accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-intelligence-us-israel-strike-ayatollah-ali-khamenei-iran/
29. The Latest: Israel hits Tehran as Iran's counterattacks widen after supreme leader is killed, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.newsday.com/news/nation/iran-israel-us-latest-03-01-2026-w93572
30. Of strikes and succession: How Iran's 'mosaic regime' endures after Khamenei's killing, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.arabnews.pk/node/2635168/middle-east
31. The D Brief: War on Iran; Retaliation throughout the Gulf; Friendly fire downs F-15s; Anthropic ejected from federal service; And a bit more., accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2026/03/the-d-brief-march-02-2026/411800/
32. CIA intel guided strikes that killed Iran's supreme leader Khamenei: report - The Hindu, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/cia-intel-guided-strikes-that-killed-irans-supreme-leader-khamenei-report/article70691443.ece
33. Trump says Iran operation could take "four weeks or less," 3 U.S. troops killed, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/us-iran-war-israel-supreme-leader-khamenei-funeral-day-2/
34. Iran Faces Leadership Crisis Amid Unverified Reports, accessed March 3, 2026, https://evrimagaci.org/gpt/iran-faces-leadership-crisis-amid-unverified-reports-532249
35. Israeli strike hits Iran's Assembly of Experts building in Qom - Yeni Safak English, accessed March 3, 2026, https://en.yenisafak.com/world/israeli-strike-hits-irans-assembly-of-experts-building-in-qom-3715355
36. CIA issues rare Persian-language appeal to Iranians for secure contact | Iran International, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202602245510
37. Iran's Future Requires Democratic Transition, Not Dynastic Restoration | RealClearWorld, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2026/01/15/irans_future_requires_democratic_transition_not_dynastic_restoration_1158957.html
38. Kirkegaard: Successful Attack on Iran Rips Rift across Middle East, Shifting Balance of Power, accessed March 3, 2026, https://kathleenhays.substack.com/p/kirkegaard-successful-attack-on-iran
39. Market Thoughts: Instant karma's gonna get you | J.P. Morgan Private Bank U.S., accessed March 3, 2026, https://privatebank.jpmorgan.com/nam/en/insights/markets-and-investing/market-thoughts/instant-karmas-gonna-get-you
40. AI simulation points to military successor after Ali Khamenei | The Jerusalem Post, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.jpost.com/business-and-innovation/tech-and-start-ups/article-887928
41. Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Military Decision-Making Process - Marine Corps University, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.usmcu.edu/Outreach/Marine-Corps-University-Press/MCU-Journal/JAMS-vol-16-no-2/Artificial-Intelligence-Enabled-Military-Decision-Making-Process/
42. Opportunities and challenges of AI-systems in political decision-making contexts - Frontiers, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2025.1504520/full
43. Trump in Tehran? Former Iranian envoy floats Hail Mary talks to avoid war, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.iranintl.com/en/202601285748
44. Enhance geopolitical risk assessment with this strategy - The World Economic Forum, accessed March 3, 2026, https://www.weforum.org/stories/2025/02/how-to-enhance-geopolitical-risk-assessment-using-combined-strategy/