US War on Terror in 76 Countries Cost $6.5 Trillion

US soldiers in Afghanistan. (AFP)
US soldiers in Afghanistan. (AFP)
TT

US War on Terror in 76 Countries Cost $6.5 Trillion

US soldiers in Afghanistan. (AFP)
US soldiers in Afghanistan. (AFP)

A US study published earlier this week revealed that the United States’ war on terrorism has cost $6.5 trillion, reported The National magazine based on report by the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University.

The ongoing war on terror began in October 2001, a month after the September 11 attacks in the US.

US President Donald Trump revealed in one of his tweets that his country has spent 7 trillion dollars on the Middle East alone.

Estimates predict that US loans to fund the war will result in an 8 trillion dollar debt by 2025.

The number of countries involved in the war has reached 76 or 39 percent of the countries in the world. The tally also lists regions where US forces are deployed on the ground, such as Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan. It also lists where American advisors are training local forces on counter-terrorism methods.

Experts said there are currently no real discussions in the United States on the cost of the war due to the nature of the conflict that lacks no stable fronts or boundaries.

A map presented by the study of the 76 countries linked to the war raised questions over the effectiveness of Washington’s approach on the conflict. They explained that the approach has turned many major cities into rubble and forced the displacement of millions of people, which has destabilized many host countries.

The map also showed the extent in which terrorist groups have spread across the world, turning the conflict against extremists into a worldwide phenomenon. The conflict stretches from as far as Southeast Asia, the Philippines, passes through the Middle East and reaches North Africa and Niger in the west of the continent.

The National said that the ongoing US war on Afghanistan is the longest in American history and it is predicted to go on even longer, especially under Trump’s administration. The current president had unveiled a national defense strategy two months ago in which he agreed to send more troops to Kabul and increase airstrikes against terrorist groups, including the Taliban.

The magazine said that the situation in Afghanistan indicates that the war will continue for a long time and it will extend beyond the country’s borders. A US Secretary of Defense report spoke of some 20 terrorist and radical groups operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The National traced back the beginnings of the war on terror. It said that the US initially launched the war by attacking Afghanistan in order to eliminate Taliban, which had great control over the country. The beginning of the war seemed promising and American forces were able to make advances in Kabul. The Taliban had incurred enough defeats that its fighters had asked US troops to allow them to lay down their arms and return to their homes.

This initial success led senior officials in the administration of then President George W. Bush to raise their expectations and ambitions. Bush and his Vice President Donald Rumsfeld then believed that there was a need to extend this success in countering terrorism to 60 other countries.

At the time, Washington saw the war on terror as being restricted to one country at a time. It then began preparing for extending this war, setting Iraq as its next target.

The war led to the toppling of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, but the National said that the US had not only intended for his ouster, but it had also set its sights on the country’s oil wealth.

A British official, who was close to the Bush administration at the time, was quoted by the magazine as saying: “Everyone wants to go to Baghdad, but real men want to go to Tehran.”

He implied that the US invasion of Iraq was not really aimed at combating terrorism, but its real target was Iraq’s oil and Washington should have shifted its attention to Iran, which had transformed into an extremist state after the 1978 Khomeini revolution.



Tracing the US Military’s Learning Curve on Fighting Iran’s Drones: What to Know

A visitor of an exhibition takes a photo of parts of an Iranian made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Shahed-131/136, which was launched on Ukrainian territories, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 27, 2025. (Reuters)
A visitor of an exhibition takes a photo of parts of an Iranian made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Shahed-131/136, which was launched on Ukrainian territories, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 27, 2025. (Reuters)
TT

Tracing the US Military’s Learning Curve on Fighting Iran’s Drones: What to Know

A visitor of an exhibition takes a photo of parts of an Iranian made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Shahed-131/136, which was launched on Ukrainian territories, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 27, 2025. (Reuters)
A visitor of an exhibition takes a photo of parts of an Iranian made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) Shahed-131/136, which was launched on Ukrainian territories, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine June 27, 2025. (Reuters)

The Iran war quickly tested America's ability to combat the swarms of cheap drones that have become a staple of the modern battlefield after Ukraine and Russia demonstrated how effective they could be.

Iran launched so many drones across the region at once that some slipped through the defenses, including a strike that killed six US soldiers at an operations center in Kuwait.

Experts and defense leaders stress that the US military has been able to shoot down the majority of Iran’s drones and take out much of its drone capabilities. But critics said too often missiles that cost millions of dollars were used to down small drones that cost tens of thousands.

The US is bringing an anti-drone system to the Middle East that has been tested in Ukraine, which had proposed a deal with the US last year to offer its drone expertise. Such an agreement is yet to be made, and American forces are facing a steep learning curve as they scramble to deploy more cost-efficient defenses against Iran's Shahed drones, which fly low and buzz like mopeds before smashing into their targets.

“We are crushing them — there’s no doubt about it — but if even one drone gets through our defenses and hurts an American, for me, that is enough to warrant fixing the problem,” said drone warfare expert Brett Velicovich, who operated Predator drones in the US Army and co-founded a drone manufacturing company.

Here’s what to know about Iran's drones and efforts by the US to shoot them down:

US says it's attacking the source of Iran's drones

Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Tuesday that the number of drones launched by Iran had fallen 83% since the war began on Feb. 28. Iran launched more than 2,000 drones in the days after the initial US and Israeli attacks, other top military officials said.

Caine told reporters that US forces were striking military and industrial targets in Iran “to deny them the ability to continue to generate those one-way attack drones.”

Hundreds — if not thousands — of Patriot missiles have been used by the US and its allies across the Middle East to defend against Iranian missiles and drones. But now the US seems to be relying more on attack helicopters and machine guns as a more cost-effective way to shoot down Iranian drones, experts say, and President Donald Trump suggested as much.

“Now we have low-cost interceptors effectively combating Iranian drones,” the Republican president said Monday.

The military also is bringing in an American anti-drone system proven to work in Ukraine against Russian drones, which are similar to Iran's, The Associated Press has reported. Known as Merops, the system flies drones against drones, fits in the back of a pickup truck and uses artificial intelligence to navigate when electronic communications are jammed.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told journalists on Tuesday that his country proposed a deal with the US last year to provide cutting-edge and battle-tested drone technology, including interceptor drones.

“I do not know whether they refused it. I’m not sure, but it was definitely postponed,” Zelenskyy said, adding that Ukraine still hopes to sign such a deal.

Experts say the US military has been slow to overhaul its arsenal and tactics to respond to the new threat from fleets of drones.

“This is going to be a big wake-up call for how the US military defends its citizens and fights wars forever,” Velicovich said. “Because it’s sort of like we’re the best military on the planet, but stuff’s still getting by us.”

Travis Metz, the Pentagon’s drone dominance program manager, told senators last week that the Defense Department has committed $1.1 billion to buy drone systems over the next 18 months, including 30,000 small, one-way attack drones to be delivered to military units over the next five months.

US is leaning on knowledge from Ukraine

Pentagon officials have conceded in classified briefings to Congress that they initially struggled to stop the waves of Iranian drones, leaving US service members and allies vulnerable. High-profile targets like a Dubai skyscraper and airports across the region have been struck.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last week that “thousands of Iranian missiles and drones have been intercepted and vaporized.” But he conceded, “this does not mean we can stop everything.”

Available in big numbers, the Shahed drones have shown their capability to oversaturate air defenses and inflict painful damage. And while the Shahed flies slowly at 180 kph (just over 110 mph), it can range as far as 2,000 kilometers (1,240 miles) and carry a relatively big load of 40 kilograms (88 pounds) of explosives.

The US military has typically operated complicated reusable drones that fire off missiles and return to base, such as the Predator. But Ukraine has shown that relying on large numbers of cheap drones, which carry their payloads directly into the target and become warheads themselves, can be extremely effective.

“There is going to be a learning curve, but the more that the Ukrainians can provide us in terms of guidance and expertise I think the better off we all are,” said Brandon Blackburn, who is a former CIA targeting officer who conducted counterterrorism operations throughout the Middle East.

Ryan Brobst, a scholar focused on US defense strategy at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a hawkish Washington think tank, said social media posts by the US military and allies have indicated the use of relatively cheaper weapons, like aircraft machine guns or laser-guided rockets, to destroy drones in Iran.

“The United States has made significant strides in counter-UAS warfare over the past few years,” Brobst said, referring to unmanned aerial systems. “But it’s also true that we can still learn more from Ukraine.”

Looking ahead to focusing on the ‘cheap stuff’

Northwestern University professor William Reno, who researches Ukraine’s military training for the Pentagon and visits the country regularly, noted that Ukraine has found cheap ways to shoot down drones with .50-caliber machine guns mounted in the back of a pickup or other fast-moving drones.

“The long-run effect will probably be that it’s going to focus minds wonderfully on thinking more seriously about cheap stuff that comes through the air,” Reno said.

For decades, US military strategy has counted on dominating the airspace above any conflict it got involved in, but the focus was primarily at higher altitudes where fighters and bombers fly. Now drones will force the military to think about what it does to control low-altitude airspace.

“Ukraine was the wake-up call,” Reno said.

The US military already has some programs centered on inexpensive drones, according to Jerry McGinn, a former Defense Department official who was focused on manufacturing and industrial base policy and is now a scholar at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

One of those programs is the Low-cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System, or LUCAS, which American forces are using in Iran. The US military said in a post on X that the American-made, one-way attack drones were “modeled after Iran’s Shahed drones.”

“It’s not public on how effective they’ve been or how they were used,” McGinn said. “But there’s very much a focus in the US of learning from the experience in Ukraine.”


Kharg Island: Iran’s Vital Oil Hub in the Crosshairs?

This handout image taken by the European Space Agency (ESA) captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite shows a view of Iran's Kharg Island, which hosts the country's main crude export terminal and is responsible for the overwhelming majority of its oil shipments to the world, about 25 kilometers south of the mainland in the north of the Gulf, on March 2, 2026. (AFP / ESA)
This handout image taken by the European Space Agency (ESA) captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite shows a view of Iran's Kharg Island, which hosts the country's main crude export terminal and is responsible for the overwhelming majority of its oil shipments to the world, about 25 kilometers south of the mainland in the north of the Gulf, on March 2, 2026. (AFP / ESA)
TT

Kharg Island: Iran’s Vital Oil Hub in the Crosshairs?

This handout image taken by the European Space Agency (ESA) captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite shows a view of Iran's Kharg Island, which hosts the country's main crude export terminal and is responsible for the overwhelming majority of its oil shipments to the world, about 25 kilometers south of the mainland in the north of the Gulf, on March 2, 2026. (AFP / ESA)
This handout image taken by the European Space Agency (ESA) captured by the Copernicus Sentinel-2 satellite shows a view of Iran's Kharg Island, which hosts the country's main crude export terminal and is responsible for the overwhelming majority of its oil shipments to the world, about 25 kilometers south of the mainland in the north of the Gulf, on March 2, 2026. (AFP / ESA)

Kharg Island, a scrubby stretch of land in the northern Gulf, handles almost all of Iran's crude exports and any attempt to seize it would mark a major escalation in the conflict, analysts say.

The US and Israel have so far treaded carefully around the island, but an Axios report over the weekend cited Trump administration officials saying capturing Kharg was on the table as the war in the Middle East persists.

The island, located around 30 kilometers (19 miles) off the Iranian mainland, handles roughly 90 percent of Iran's crude exports, according to a JP Morgan note released Sunday.

Any move on the territory, which is about one-third the size of Manhattan, would have swift repercussions, experts say.

"A direct strike would immediately halt the bulk of Iran's crude exports, likely triggering severe retaliation in the Strait of Hormuz or against regional energy infrastructure," JP Morgan said.

Iranian strikes have all but halted maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz -- through which a fifth of global crude oil and liquefied natural gas normally pass -- and have also impacted oil infrastructure in other Gulf states.

But Iranian energy assets have not been degraded so far and targeting the island would be "a very risky move", Farzin Nadimi, senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told AFP.

Iran is not only "experienced in using alternatives" in wartime, it could "cause a lot more damage on the Gulf oil and gas installations if they want to and they can do a lot more very quickly, and everybody knows that".

"I don't think that seizing the island will go any further than US Congressional debates," he added -- the prospect having been discussed in Washington since the hostage crisis that started in 1979 during the foundation of the Islamic republic.

Kharg underwent key developments during Iran's oil expansion in the 1960s and 1970s, with much of the country's coast too shallow for supertankers.

Iran has looked to diversify its export capabilities by opening the Jask terminal outside the Strait of Hormuz chokepoint in the Gulf of Oman in 2021, but Kharg remains "a critical vulnerability" for Iran, JP Morgan said.

"It is a cornerstone of Iran's economy and a major source of revenue for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard," JP Morgan added, referring to the well-resourced ideological branch of Iran's army.

- 'Very difficult' -

The war has sent oil prices soaring, although US President Donald Trump's suggestion on Monday that the conflict could end soon has calmed the market.

Over the weekend, the director of the White House National Energy Dominance Council Jarrod Agen told Fox News that "what we want to do is get such massive oil reserves in Iran out of the hands of terrorists".

Also in recent days, the Washington Post reported heightened speculation that US ground forces could be being prepared to deploy, citing analysts saying Kharg Island would be an early target.

Nadimi said Washington could move to seize the island when hostilities end, but that it was "not a wise move" during combat when Kharg is "almost an entire island of oil facilities and pipelines and tank farms".

"It is very difficult to wage a military operation on that particular island," he said.

But other oil infrastructure could be in the crosshairs, with Trump repeatedly referencing his operation to topple Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and gain access to the country's oil reserves in January as a blueprint.

Iran -- the fourth-biggest crude producer within the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) -- vowed not one liter of oil would be exported from the Gulf while the war continues.

Any attack on its infrastructure would get an "eye for an eye" response, it said.

On Saturday, Israel launched its first attack of the war on oil facilities in Iran, but it said they were used "to operate military infrastructure".

The same day, Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid argued for stronger steps, saying in an X post: "Israel needs to destroy all of Iran's oil fields and energy industry on Kharg Island; that's what will crush Iran's economy and bring down the regime."


Lebanon’s Latest Conflict Brings Rare Public Backlash Against Hezbollah as War Flares Again

Two women look at the sea as boxes of food prepared for Iftar during Ramadan lie on a bench along the Corniche, following an escalation between Hezbollah and Israel amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Beirut, Lebanon, March 10, 2026. (Reuters)
Two women look at the sea as boxes of food prepared for Iftar during Ramadan lie on a bench along the Corniche, following an escalation between Hezbollah and Israel amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Beirut, Lebanon, March 10, 2026. (Reuters)
TT

Lebanon’s Latest Conflict Brings Rare Public Backlash Against Hezbollah as War Flares Again

Two women look at the sea as boxes of food prepared for Iftar during Ramadan lie on a bench along the Corniche, following an escalation between Hezbollah and Israel amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Beirut, Lebanon, March 10, 2026. (Reuters)
Two women look at the sea as boxes of food prepared for Iftar during Ramadan lie on a bench along the Corniche, following an escalation between Hezbollah and Israel amid the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Beirut, Lebanon, March 10, 2026. (Reuters)

The Lebanese mother of two had just awakened to prepare the pre-dawn meal before another day of fasting during the holy month of Ramadan when Israeli warplanes began attacking southern Lebanon in retaliation for rockets and drones launched by Hezbollah.

The family quickly packed up and headed toward Beirut, seeking safety from another deadly war between Israel and Hezbollah. With tens of thousands of others fleeing on that March 2 day, the usually one-hour trip from the southern city of Nabatiyeh took 15 hours.

“I am against giving pretexts to Israel,” said the 45-year-old woman, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals from the Hezbollah supporters she lives among.

“I am totally against Hezbollah’s decision to start with the first strike,” said the woman, who is now living with her husband, their 17- and 12-year-old children, and her mother-in-law inside a school turned into a shelter in the Lebanese capital.

As Hezbollah enters a new round of fighting with Israel just 15 months after the last Israel-Hezbollah war ended with a November 2024 US-brokered ceasefire, the Iran-backed group and political party is facing increasing grassroots discontent within its base and problems with the Lebanese authorities.

Population still reeling from the previous war

On March 2, two days after Israel and the US launched attacks on Iran, igniting a war in the Middle East, Hezbollah fired missiles and drones into Israel for the first time in more than a year.

Hundreds of thousands of residents of southern Lebanon, the eastern Bekaa valley and Beirut’s southern suburbs have fled their homes after Israeli warnings that their neighborhoods, towns and villages would be targeted.

The new round of fighting comes as Shiite communities that suffered the brunt of the last conflict are still reeling from it. The last Israel-Hezbollah war killed more than 4,000 people in Lebanon and caused $11 billion in damage, according to the World Bank.

Unlike in the past, when many people were afraid to publicly criticize Hezbollah, some Lebanese Shiites are openly blaming the group for their current misery as they find themselves living in the street, on public squares, or with relatives or friends amid cold weather and fasting during Ramadan.

For Hussein Ali, it was the second time in less than two years that he was forced to leave his house in Beirut’s southern suburb of Haret Hreik. During the last Israel-Hezbollah war, the apartment where he lived was destroyed and now the vegetable vendor is worried the same thing will happen again.

“No one wanted this war,” said the man, who is also staying in the school and relying on aid to survive. “People haven’t recovered from the previous war."

Government takes a harsher stance

After the end of Lebanon's civil war in 1990, militias were required to disarm, but Hezbollah was exempted because it was fighting Israel's occupation of southern Lebanon at the time.

Now the Lebanese government has sought to crack down on the group’s armed wing and end its status as a parallel armed force outside of state control.

The shift was clear when, on March 2, the Lebanese government moved to declare Hezbollah’s military activities illegal, with all but two of the 24 Cabinet ministers voting in favor; only the two Hezbollah ministers voted no. Even ministers from Hezbollah’s strongest ally, the Amal group of Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, voted to approve the measure.

“The government confirms that the decision of war and peace is only in the hand of the state,” Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said, adding that the government “orders the immediate ban on all of Hezbollah’s military activities as they are illegal and it should be forced to hand over its weapons to the Lebanese state.”

The Lebanese army has since begun to crack down and last week arrested three Hezbollah members who were found transporting weapons at a checkpoint. But the men were released on bail Monday.

Government officials have accused Hezbollah of repeatedly taking unilateral military actions that should be under state authority. On Oct. 8, 2023, the group began attacking Israel a day after the assault led by the Iranian-backed Hamas on southern Israel triggered the war in Gaza.

Now, the group has entered the fray on behalf of Iran to avenge the killing of its supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, as well as in retaliation, it says, for Israeli violations of the November 2024 ceasefire.

Some Hezbollah supporters see the war as justified

Ali al-Amin, a Lebanese journalist who is a harsh critic of Hezbollah, said that while some people are now criticizing the armed group more than in the past, many still remain quiet out of fear for their safety.

“Criticism could have a high cost and not all people express their opinions,” said al-Amin, a Shiite from south Lebanon, who added that many poor Shiites rely on assistance that could be cut off anytime by Hezbollah or the allied Amal movement.

In the past, people who criticized Hezbollah on social media were sometimes roughed up by its supporters and forced to make new videos saying they were wrong.

But the group still has many supporters. They say that Hezbollah's decision to strike was justified because Israel had not abided by the November 2024 ceasefire.

Since the ceasefire, Israel has continued to carry out almost daily airstrikes against Hezbollah, which have killed about 400 people, including dozens of civilians, and that have also prevented the reconstruction of destroyed areas.

“We cannot tolerate that anymore,” said Ali Saleh who was displaced from a southern village near Nabatiyeh. “I pray for God to protect our young men and make them victorious against Israel."

Even the Shiite woman who criticized Hezbollah's move to strike first said that if the party hadn't, the result might have been the same.

“If we attack they will attack us and if we don’t attack they would have attacked us,” she said.

Sadek Nabulsi, a political science professor at the Lebanese University whose thinking aligns with Hezbollah, said the latest complaints are nothing new and don’t represent a fissure in grassroots support for the Iranian-allied groups. There was a similar outcry during the 14-month Israel-Hezbollah war that ended in 2024 and the monthlong war in 2006, he said.

“Hezbollah’s base of support is known for ... tolerating pain,” Nabulsi said. “If you look at this base of support, despite all the harsh conditions, it is still coherent, patient and waiting for salvation.”