How the US and Israel’s tech war against Iran began

(Technological analysis of Operation Epic Fury taken from the Tech & Privacy newsletter)

This analysis examines the role of advanced technologies in Operation Epic Fury (also known as Roaring Lion from the Israeli side), conducted on February 28, 2026, and the following days.

Based on official reports and analyses from authoritative sources, this overview focuses on the integration of artificial intelligence (AI), cyber warfare, electronic warfare (EW), and low-cost drones, outlining the entities involved, general functionalities, and specific applications in the operational context.

Geopolitical considerations are integrated to contextualize the strategic impact, assuming an audience with general knowledge but not necessarily specialized in technical-military fields.

The information derives from Centcom documents, Pentagon reports, analyses from the Wall Street Journal, Reuters, and other verified sources, emphasizing a balanced approach that acknowledges both operational advantages and ethical and humanitarian implications, including reported deaths of innocent civilians (over 130 in Iran, including the incident at an elementary school).

AI platforms facilitated intelligence gathering and analysis, enabling precise targeting and operational simulations. From a geopolitical perspective, such tools strengthen the technological asymmetry between Western powers and adversaries like Iran, potentially accelerating escalation in unstable regions, but raising questions about accountability and the risk of errors that amplify collateral damage.

•  Palantir Technologies: a U.S. company founded in 2003, specialized in data analysis and AI software, with significant government contracts (including those with the U.S. Department of Defense). Generally, its platforms create “digital twins” – virtual models of real environments – to integrate heterogeneous data from sensors, satellites, and open sources, supporting decisions in sectors such as finance, logistics, and national security. In the military context, it optimizes intelligence for complex operations. Specific application: It supported tracking the movements of Ayatollah Khamenei and modeling key Iranian sites (e.g., compounds in Tehran), facilitating targeted strikes on nuclear and missile infrastructure such as Natanz and Fordow. Geopolitically, this exemplifies the influence of U.S. tech companies in power dynamics but is criticized for potential privacy violations and contributing to leadership “decapitation,” with risks of post-regime instability.

•  Habsora System (Gospel): developed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), it is an AI framework for automated target generation. Generally, it processes intelligence data (from drones, interceptions, and surveillance) to identify targets with high efficiency, reducing decision times from days to hours; operational since 2021 in contexts such as operations against Hezbollah. Specific application: It generated lists of hundreds of Iranian targets per day, including IRGC bases and nuclear sites, integrating with joint U.S.-Israeli intelligence. From a geopolitical perspective, it strengthens Israeli superiority in the Levant but is subject to debate for the potential increase in civilian casualties (e.g., the attack on an Iranian school), fueling tensions with regional actors and complicating Arab alliances.

•  Anthropic Claude: developed by Anthropic, a U.S. company founded in 2021 focusing on “responsible” AI, Claude is a large language model (LLM) for text processing and simulations. Generally, it supports document analysis, scenario forecasting, and decision optimization in fields such as research, business, and intelligence. In the military, it is employed for risk assessments and targeting. Specific application: Used by the Pentagon for intelligence analysis and Epic Fury simulations, despite a U.S. presidential ban at the end of February due to ethical controversies. Geopolitically, it highlights internal U.S. frictions between technological innovation and regulation, potentially weakening cohesion against threats like Iran’s nuclear program.

2. INITIAL PHASE (FEBRUARY 28, 2026): CYBER WARFARE AND ELECTRONIC WARFARE TO DEGRADE ADVERSARY CAPABILITIES

These technologies aim to disrupt enemy networks and communications without initial kinetic use, creating operational windows for subsequent strikes. Geopolitically, they enable “non-lethal” operations that minimize own losses but can isolate civilian populations, fostering internal instability and risking asymmetric retaliations on global infrastructures.

•  US Cyber Command and Space Command: entities of the U.S. Department of Defense, with Cyber Command focused on offensive digital operations and Space Command on satellite assets for disruption. Generally, they conduct hacking, jamming, and degradation of adversary systems, as seen in Ukrainian contexts against Russia. Specific application: they orchestrated an almost total internet blackout in Iran (connectivity reduced to 1-4%, according to NetBlocks) and hijacking of state media sites to spread destabilizing messages. Geopolitically, this neutralized Iranian proxies (e.g., Hezbollah, Houthis), altering the regional balance but exposed vulnerabilities to counter-cyberattacks (limited in Iran due to physical damages suffered).

•  EA-18G Growler: produced by Boeing, it is an electronic warfare aircraft based on a carrier platform. Generally, it employs jamming systems to neutralize enemy radars and communications, protecting aerial formations. Specific application: It degraded Iranian air defenses, allowing safe entry of assets like F-35 and B-2. Geopolitically, it underscores U.S. power projection in the Gulf, but Iranian retaliations (e.g., missiles on UAE causing 3 deaths) risk economic escalation, including disruptions to oil routes through the Strait of Hormuz.

•  Hijacking of the BadeSaba App: Iranian app for religious calendars (with over 5 million downloads), developed by private entities. Generally, it provides reminders for prayers and Islamic dates. Specific application: Compromised by U.S.-Israeli actors to send psy-op notifications like “It’s time for reckoning” and calls to desert, synchronized with initial strikes. Geopolitically, it exploits sectarian divisions (Shiites vs. internal opponents), promoting regime change but potentially radicalizing global Muslim communities.

3. KINETIC PHASE: LOW-COST DRONES FOR MASS STRIKES

These systems represent a paradigm of “affordable mass,” economical weapons to overwhelm adversary defenses. Geopolitically, they democratize warfare, but the irony of using Iranian derivatives against Tehran highlights global technological diffusion, with risks of proliferation to non-state actors.

•  LUCAS (Low-Cost Uncrewed Combat Attack System): produced by SpektreWorks, a U.S. company based in Arizona, specialized in unmanned vehicles. Generally, these are modular kamikaze drones (costing 10-55,000 USD per unit), derived from reverse-engineering the Iranian Shahed-136 captured in Ukraine, launchable from various platforms. Specific application: first combat use in Epic Fury, in swarms to suppress radars and strike Shahed factories and IRGC sites. Geopolitically, it overturns the Iranian “playbook” but amplifies asymmetric threats (e.g., retaliations on Dubai), destabilizing Gulf economic hubs.

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS AND GEOPOLITICAL IMPLICATIONS

The integration of these technologies gave Epic Fury a hybrid effectiveness, with initial blinding followed by precise strikes, reducing U.S. losses but causing significant civilian damage in Iran. Geopolitically, it marks an evolution towards multi-domain warfare, potentially accelerating the decline of the Iranian “resistance axis” and reshaping the Middle East (post-Assad, weakened Hezbollah).

However, it raises ethical questions about AI accountability, risks of nuclear escalation, and global economic instability (e.g., oil prices).

Responsibility remains human, and diplomacy remains essential to mitigate many dynamic issues.