In June 2024, just months before his death, Hassan Nasrallah, the former Secretary-General of Hezbollah, directly threatened the island of Cyprus, saying the group would target it if Israel used its military infrastructure—particularly its airports—to launch attacks against Hezbollah.
In March 2026, two days after the start of the U.S.-Israeli operation “Epic Fury” against Iran, British bases on the island of Cyprus were struck by drones. While reports circulated that the drones originated from Iran, a Cypriot source told Reuters that all indications point to the drones that targeted British bases in Cyprus having been launched by Hezbollah from Lebanon.
The attack has raised questions about why the Mediterranean island was targeted, and whether the strike is linked to Nasrallah’s previous threats or to new calculations tied to current developments in the Middle East.
Ilan Berman, Vice President of the American Foreign Policy Council, told Alhurra that despite the well-known close ties between Cyprus and Israel in the eyes of Hezbollah and Iran, the attack appears to have been driven by a decision from the Iranian regime itself, rather than simply being the implementation of Nasrallah’s June 2024 warning. He said the move falls within a broader Iranian strategy aimed at raising the cost of the conflict for Israel’s partners and the United States, in order to pressure them to push Washington and Tel Aviv toward ending military operations.
For his part, Pierre Razoux, Academic and Research Director at the Mediterranean Foundation for Strategic Studies, told Alhurra that the move does not appear to be connected to earlier calculations, but rather constitutes “a very clear message sent by Iran to the British: ‘Be careful about what you are doing. If you continue assisting the United States and allowing the U.S. Air Force to use your bases in Cyprus, we will strike harder next time.’” According to Razoux, Iran’s strategy aims to deter the British—just as it seeks to do with Gulf states—from supporting the United States, and what we are currently seeing are “strategic signaling strikes.”
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer quickly denied that U.S. bombers had used British bases in Cyprus, in line with a cautious stance toward the war—one that reportedly frustrated U.S. President Donald Trump, who said, “It’s sad that relations with Britain are not what they used to be.”
Several European Union countries appear to be taking the threats against the normally quiet island seriously. Cypriot officials said Tuesday that France intends to send anti-missile and counter-drone systems to Cyprus, while Greece has also offered assistance in protecting the island, which has modest defensive capabilities and virtually no air force. Although the targeted base is sovereign British territory, it is located near populated areas inhabited by Cypriots, prompting hundreds of residents to evacuate their homes.
Cypriot government spokesperson Konstantinos Letymbiotis said France would send anti-missile and counter-drone systems, as well as a frigate, confirming earlier reports by the state news agency. French President Emmanuel Macron informed Cypriot President Nikos Christodoulides early Tuesday morning of his intention to do so.
Greece on Monday sent four F-16 fighter jets to the island. Two frigates are also sailing toward Cyprus, one of which is equipped with the Centaurus counter-drone jamming system. A knowledgeable source said Tuesday that Britain has not yet decided whether it will send a warship to defend the base.
Lebanon’s Hezbollah has entered the war after launching rockets at Israel. Assessments suggest the group was responsible for launching the drones at Cyprus, although Hezbollah has suffered significant degradation of its capabilities following Israeli strikes and ongoing efforts by the Lebanese government and army to disarm it. Nevertheless, it appears the group still retains the ability to launch some rockets and drones. Why, then, did it choose Cyprus? And is it seeking to expand the battlefield despite its limited capabilities?
Razoux answers that Hezbollah lacks both the means and the will to do so: “Hezbollah seeks to craft a narrative showing that it is acting on behalf of Iranian authority—but at the minimum level necessary to avoid jeopardizing its own survival.”
Berman, meanwhile, argues that the attempt to expand the theater of conflict to include the Eastern Mediterranean reflects Iranian thinking aimed at scrambling the strategic landscape, “but it remains a high-risk gamble.” According to Berman, this escalation sends a negative message to Iran’s neighbors—that the Islamic Republic is a “dangerous neighbor”—thereby turning those countries into active participants in efforts to fundamentally undermine the Iranian threat. Although the attack aimed to drive a wedge between allies, the intensive European defensive response suggests the outcome may have been the opposite of what Tehran intended.
The article is a translation of the original Arabic.
Rami Al Amine
A Lebanese writer and journalist living in the United States. He holds a master’s degree in Islamic-Christian Relations from the Faculty of Religious Sciences at Saint Joseph University in Beirut. He is the author of the poetry collection “I Am a Great Poet” (Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabiya, 2007); the political pamphlet “Ya Ali, We Are No Longer the People of the South” (Lebanese Plans, 2008); a book on social media titled “The Facebookers” (Dar Al-Jadeed, 2012); and “The Pakistanis: A Statue’s Biography” (Dar Al-Nahda Al-Arabiya, 2024).
