Israel escalates its conflict with Iran, risking a major war
What was long expected — perhaps even inevitable — has finally happened. Early on the morning of June 13, Israel launched a massive strike on Iran, targeting its nuclear facilities. Iran responded by attacking Israeli military infrastructure and cities across the country, including Tel Aviv. Air defense systems on both sides were unable to stop many of the missiles and drones that reached their targets. The Middle East is now teetering on the edge of nuclear disaster.
The Israeli assault involved 200 aircraft and over 330 munitions. Meanwhile, Mossad activated a base of attack drones reportedly positioned inside Iran and coordinated them with the Israeli Air Force. Israeli officials claim that the Natanz nuclear facility was completely destroyed.
At least 20 high-ranking Iranian military commanders were killed, and the Israeli military reported eliminating nine key nuclear scientists and experts involved in Iran’s nuclear program. In turn, Iran’s retaliatory strikes left dozens dead and hundreds wounded in Israel.
The central question until now had been whether Iran was willing to engage with the U.S., which had ostensibly been acting as a mediator between Israel and Iran. Washington proposed a nuclear deal based on a regional uranium enrichment consortium aimed at easing Israeli concerns. For Tehran, however, the real question was whether Israel would accept this plan in exchange for a halt to hostilities.
Even before the recent escalation, Iran stated that it would consider such a consortium on the condition that it be based on Iranian soil. The U.S. proposal included participation from Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, and Turkey. Nevertheless, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continued to tell his domestic audience that only the destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities would satisfy Israel.
It now appears that the sixth round of U.S.–Iran nuclear talks is off the table. «What’s the point?» asked Alaeddin Boroujerdi, a senior member of Iran’s Parliamentary Committee on National Security and Foreign Affairs. Iranians no longer trust U.S. promises, much less conciliatory statements from Israel. Tehran has seemingly abandoned diplomatic niceties with Washington.
An Israeli strike on Iran was always a matter of when, not if. That moment has arrived, and Israel has given itself a free hand. The key question is: How far will it go? If Israel concludes that its attack did not critically damage Iran’s nuclear program, another escalation seems imminent. Iran has already warned that it will respond «not recklessly, but decisively».
Another unresolved issue is the extent of U.S. involvement in Israel’s offensive. Just a week earlier, Donald Trump and other top American officials had expressed concern that Israel might attack Iran’s nuclear sites without consulting Washington, which could potentially derail negotiations. After the attack, Secretary of State Marco Rubio quickly distanced the U.S. from the operation, calling it a «unilateral action» by Israel. Trump later stated that the U.S. had «no involvement» in the attack but issued a stark warning to Tehran:
«If we are attacked in any way, shape or form by Iran, the full strength and might of the U.S. Armed Forces will come down on you at levels never seen before», he wrote on Truth Social.
Yet, many suspect that the U.S. is playing a double game, carefully cultivating the image of a neutral observer. Could the Biden (or rather, the reinstated Trump) administration be using this to shield itself from global criticism? Some experts believe it’s unlikely that Israel would risk such a world-altering operation without consulting its closest ally. Trump, widely regarded as the most pro-Israel president in U.S. history, may have given tacit approval behind the scenes.
Why would Israel choose to escalate now, just as the U.S. and Iran were engaged in nuclear negotiations? From Israel’s perspective, Iran poses an existential threat. Shortly after the airstrikes, the Israeli Defense Forces issued a statement describing the operation as a «preemptive strike». They claimed that Iran’s nuclear program had reached a critical threshold and posed an existential danger. According to Israeli intelligence, Tehran was preparing for Israel’s destruction.
Yet Iran has little desire for war with Israel. While Iran also sees Israel as an existential adversary, this perception stems from repeated Israeli threats to destroy Iran. Tehran knows that, in a full-scale war — especially a nuclear one — the U.S. would inevitably side with Israel, creating an enormous imbalance of power. Why would Iran initiate a conflict it knows it would likely lose?
This logic underpins Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s post-attack statement. Iran is prepared to sign a treaty guaranteeing that it will not develop nuclear weapons and cease its bombardment of Israel if Israel halts its aggression. The message is clear: Iran is still trying to pull back from the brink.
Whether Iran actually possesses nuclear warheads remains unknown. However, it certainly has delivery systems capable of reaching Israel. One thing is certain: Iran has never shown a willingness to completely abandon its nuclear program, and it has even fewer reasons to do so now. The fates of Libya, Iraq, and Syria are etched into Iran’s strategic memory. Muammar Gaddafi of Libya abandoned nuclear development in exchange for Western approval and was later overthrown and killed. Israel bombed nuclear sites in Iraq and Syria. In contrast, North Korea’s survival is seen as a reward for having nuclear weapons.
According to Israeli analysts, Tehran has come to the conclusion that nuclear weapons are the only true deterrent. Iran will never surrender that option nor believe the peaceful promises of Israel or the U.S.
This leaves Israel with one solution: to eliminate Iran entirely and destroy its statehood, as was done to Libya, Iraq, and Syria. Now in their fractured, quasi-state form, none of those countries pose a serious threat to Israel. Israel appears determined to destroy Iran before Tehran’s possession of nuclear weapons becomes undeniable.
From Iran’s viewpoint, that means only one thing: it must develop nuclear weapons or risk annihilation. In this logic, nuclear arms are not for aggression but for survival.
Whether Israel’s recent strike critically damaged Iran remains to be seen. If not, a larger nuclear strike may follow to ensure Tehran’s total destruction. For Israel, a «half-destroyed Iran» is far more dangerous than Iran was before June 13.
Iran now has nothing to lose. Its survival is at stake, and Tehran knows it. If Israel damaged Iran’s nuclear infrastructure but failed to stop it, Iran can no longer afford to wait and hope. Tehran will continue to pursue diplomacy until the very end. However, no one can say for certain whether Iran won’t eventually use nuclear weapons, if it has them.
It’s not just the Middle East that stands on the edge of catastrophe. The entire world may be on the brink of nuclear conflict. A nuclear exchange between Israel and Iran would almost certainly not stay confined to the region. Let’s hope this prediction is wrong.