Iran almost certainly will retaliate against US. But when, where and how?
Former US officials say if history is any guide, Iran and its hardline Supreme Leader will strike back following the US bombing of three nuclear facilities.
What comes next?
Iran − and its hardline Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei – are almost certainly going to strike back in response to historic U.S. military strikes on three of its suspected nuclear facilities.
But if history is any guide, that response could happen at any time − and anywhere, and in potentially any form, former U.S. intelligence officials and diplomatic experts say.
'Missiles, militias and acts of hostage taking – that's their go-to' range of options, the Biden administration coordinator for the Middle East, Brett McGurk, said in a June 21 interview with CNN. 'I suspect Iran will have to do something.'
More: Who is Iran's Supreme Leader? Like Trump, he controls a real-estate empire
But like others wondering about Iran's intentions, McGurk said he has no idea what the Islamic regime's next step will be.
That's especially the case given President Donald Trump's warning that any retaliatory act will be met with potentially even greater force than what he says obliterated the uranium enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.
'If peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill,' Trump said in a June 21 evening address to the nation. 'Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes.'
In an early morning briefing June 22, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said he hoped the scope of the surprise attack would persuade Tehran's mullahs not to retaliate. "We believe that will have a clear psychological impact on how they view the future," Hegseth said, "and we certainly hope they take the path of negotiated peace."
Former Trump National Security Advisor John Bolton told USA TODAY that Iran 'may well retaliate, but this is the kind of decision that can fragment the regime at the top, and ultimately bring it down.'
"Right now, Iran has one military adversary which is pounding it and its terrorist proxies with great success,' Bolton said in reference to Israel, which had previously attacked Tehran's suspected nuclear sites. 'Is Iran really eager to add the United States as a second military adversary? Some Iranian ayatollahs and military flag officers may not be suicidal.'
Former top U.S. counterterrorism official Javed Ali agreed that a strong Iranian counterpunch is 'possible but very risky, and the situation is very different then in January 2020 when the U.S. and Iran last attacked each other" after the first Trump administration assassinated Iranian military leader Qasem Soleimani. On Jan. 8, 2020, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) launched ballistic missiles at Iraqi bases housing U.S. troops, wounding more than 100 U.S. service members.
Opening a new chapter in the 46-year US-Iran battle
Karim Sadjadpour, a Carnegie Endowment for International Peace senior fellow and longtime Iran watcher, said it's 'unlikely the Iranians will see it the same way' as Trump and Hegseth
'This is more likely to open a new chapter of the 46-year-old US-Iran war than conclude it,' Sadjadpour, who regularly advises senior U.S., European and Asian officials on Iran, said in a series of postings on X.
But he too said many of Iran's retaliatory options are 'the strategic equivalent of a suicide bombing,' given the potential counterpunch by the United States and Israel.
A range of potential Iranian options
The Tehran regime, with its powerful military and numerous proxy fighting forces in the Middle East, could strike U.S. troops in the region, experts and former officials said. It could also attack U.S. embassies and civilian targets frequented by Americans, they said, and potentially launch cyberattacks against critical infrastructure in the United States.
Another option: attacking oil facilities in the Persian Gulf or mining the Strait of Hormuz to shut down international shipping lanes, with the help of the Houthi militias that Tehran trains and funds in Yemen.
Iran could also launch destructive terrorist attacks using Hezbollah fighters that have been blowing up U.S. military and civilian targets in the region since the 1983 bombings of the U.S. Embassy and a Marine Corps barracks in Lebanon that killed 300 people.
And Iran could launch some of its vast arsenal of missiles against Israel, though that would risk having many of them shot down by Israel's Iron Dome defense apparatus.
Tehran also has some of the world's most accomplished cyberwarriors, and could also cause chaos and disruption by attacking U.S. critical infrastructure.
That risk is both credible and growing, said Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery, a former executive director of the Cyberspace Solarium Commission, following a 700% increase in similar attacks on Israeli critical infrastructure.
'If you ask me, is it possible? Yes,' said Montgomery, a senior fellow at the McCrary Institute at Auburn University. 'Is it likely? Yes.'
Iran's 'Supreme Leader' likely will dictate its response
Much, if not all, of Iran's response will be dictated not by its civilian government but by Khamenei, the Iranian cleric who has served as the second supreme leader of Iran since 1989.
Khameini is considered one of the longest-serving dictators in the world, who rules the oil-rich Islamic republic with an iron fist. But he's also a savvy politician who knows that his regime 'may not survive the blowback' that a response would trigger, Sadjadpour said
The U.S. intelligence community has, for years, made similar assessments.
In its most recent annual assessment, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence concluded Tehran will continue to use its loose consortium of like-minded terrorist and militant actors, known as the 'Axis of Resistance,' against the U.S. and Israel.
Although Iran has seen some of its proxies destroyed or degraded, 'these actors still represent a wide range of threats' that could be mobilized in a counterattack, the ODNI said.
But the ODNI also concluded that Khamenei 'continues to desire to avoid embroiling Iran in an expanded, direct conflict with the United States and its allies.'
While Khamenei is not considered to be a reckless gambler, he has also painted himself into a corner by saying publicly that Tehran would never cave in to U.S. pressure. On June 18, he issued a grave warning to the U.S., saying it would suffer 'irreparable damage' if it engages in military action against Iran amid its conflict with Israel.
As a result, Sadjadpour said, 'His survival instincts and defiant instincts are in great tension now.'
Iran's ability to respond is diminished − but by how much?
Iran's response undoubtedly will be hampered by lethal attacks on its military and proxy forces by Washington and Israel in recent years, beginning with the first Trump administration's targeted killing of Soleimani.
Soleimani's death prompted 'real and specific threats' and assassination plots against Trump and former Trump administration officials on U.S. soil, including Bolton.
More: Trump says US intel briefed him about how Iran wants to assassinate him to sow discord in US
Tehran's regional power also has been eroded by the death of its strongest regional ally, Syrian strongman Bashir al-Assad. Israel has decimated its most powerful proxy, Hezbollah, by a series of military strikes and assassinations. And Trump, since returning to office, has launched numerous military strikes on Yemen's Houthis.
For now, the U.S. will be watching and waiting to see if Khameini and Iran decide to launch some kind of 'one-off' unilateral response, or a coordinated effort with – or through – one of these proxy groups – or a third, Hamas.
'We have to be ready for that,' said McGurk.
Like others, McGurk said it's also possible that Iran will stand down, and heed Trump's warning not to retaliate or face a potential regime ending response.
'I hope that's where this goes,' McGurk said. 'We've got to be prepared for the worst while hoping and working for the best. … These next few days will be quite something. These are unprecedented times.'
By 1 a.m. Washington time, Iran had already fired its first retaliatory missile, according to media reports citing the Israeli Defense Forces.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
7 minutes ago
- USA Today
Can Donald Trump run for president in 2028? Constitution sets two-term limit
President Trump has remained a divisive figure, prompting mass protests and receiving low approval ratings. Can he run again in 2028? Does he want to? Protesters in some cities took to the streets on June 22 after President Donald Trump's decision to bomb three nuclear facilities in Iran. It was far from the first protest against Trump's actions since he took office in January, and far more Americans have protested since the beginning of this year than during the same time frame in his first term in office or during President Joe Biden's first year in office. Trump is one of two presidents in U.S. history to serve nonconsecutive terms, and his approval ratings remain historically low. But back in the White House, he has toyed with the prospect of running for a third term, which is barred by the U.S. Constitution. Most recently, he said he was not considering it. Still, the Trump Organization sells "Trump 2028" hats. Here is what to know. What is Iran's next move? World awaits response to U.S. bombing: Live updates Can Donald Trump run for president in 2028? Under the Constitution as it stands, Donald Trump cannot be elected to a third term. It is explicitly barred by the 22nd Amendment. Changes to the Constitution are extremely difficult and rare, as they require a two-thirds majority vote in both the House and Senate. States can also spur an amendment, but it requires two-thirds of the state legislatures to call a constitutional convention and three-fourths to ratify it. Trump won the 2016 presidential election against Hillary Clinton, becoming the 45th president of the United States from 2017 to 2021. He then lost the 2020 election against Biden. Trump won the 2024 election. At first, Trump was up for a rematch before Biden dropped his reelection bid and was replaced on the Democratic ticket by former Vice President Kamala Harris. Trump won the election, and his second term as the 47th U.S. president is slated for 2025 to 2029. What has Trump said about a potential third term? Trump has repeatedly floated the idea of a third term throughout his second presidency. In a March NBC interview, he said there are methods to make it happen, including if Vice President JD Vance runs for office and then hands the role to Trump. In a later interview with NBC's "Meet the Press" that aired on May 4, Trump backed off the idea, saying he was not looking at running again. "I will say this. So many people want me to do it. I have never had requests so strong as that," Trump said in the interview with NBC. "But it's something that, to the best of my knowledge, you're not allowed to do. I don't know if that's constitutional that they're not allowing you to do it or anything else." The Trump Organization did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the "Trump 2028" hats. Only one president has served more than two terms America's founding father and first president, President George Washington, voluntarily stepped down after two terms, creating an unofficial tradition for future presidents to follow suit. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was the first and only president to break that tradition. The country was still recovering from the Great Depression, and at the dawn of World War II, he was re-elected to his third term. After leading the country through the global war, he was elected again in 1944, but died the following year. A movement in the House of Representatives to officially limit the presidency terms, now ratified as the 22nd Amendment, began two years after Roosevelt's death. Contributing: Riley Beggin, Deborah Barfield Berry, USA TODAY Kinsey Crowley is the Trump Connect reporter for the USA TODAY Network. Reach her at kcrowley@ Follow her on X and TikTok @kinseycrowley or Bluesky at @
Washington Post
9 minutes ago
- Washington Post
The Strait of Hormuz is a vital route for oil. Closing it could backfire on Iran
The war between Israel and Iran has raised concerns that Iran could retaliate by trying to close the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil chokepoint due to the large volumes of crude that pass through it every day. The U.S. military's strike on three sites in Iran over the weekend has raised questions about how its military might respond.
USA Today
9 minutes ago
- USA Today
The U.S. helped oust an Iranian regime before. Here's what happened in 1953.
In the days following the U.S. strikes in Iran, President Donald Trump has threatened to depose Iran's leader and institute a regime change, igniting debates over interventionism and resurfacing memories of the last time America helped topple a government in Iran decades ago. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on June 22. Live updates: What is Iran's next move? World awaits response to U.S. bombing Trump's post came after officials in his administration, including U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, took much different tones, saying they were not working to overthrow Iran's government and do not want a regime change. As next steps remain unclear, the specter of American involvement in a plan to depose the Iranian regime raises immediate comparisons to Iran's 1953 coup, when American and British intelligence agencies aided in the forced removal of a democratically elected leader. While the current crisis is a far cry from the domestic and international events surrounding the 1953 coup, talk of regime change evokes memories of the U.S.-backed operation that had far-reaching effects in Iran and across the region more than 70 years ago. Here's what to know about what happened then. More: The risks for Trump of 'regime change' in Iran: Just ask George W. Bush Iran and the U.S.—were they always adversarial? As the Cold War took hold in the 1950s, Washington relied on Iran's reigning Shah to help stem Soviet influence spreading further in the oil-producing Middle East. The British had relied on nearly unfettered access to the Iranian oil industry via the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, later to become BP. US Iran strikes: What does regime change mean? Trump comments on Iran leadership But Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and his monarchist rule were growing unpopular at home among Iranians, and in 1951, Mohammad Mossadegh was elected as prime minister. Shortly after, he nationalized Iranian oil production in a bid to reclaim the country's oil industry and profits from significant foreign control. What led to the 1953 coup in Iran? Britain, shut out from Iranian oil, leaned on the U.S. for assistance. The American government at the time worried that Mossadegh's government signaled an end to Western footholds in the region in the face of Cold War-era anxieties and the USSR's push to expand its influence. In 1953, the CIA and MI6 orchestrated the overthrow of Mossadegh in 'Operation Ajax,' led by senior officer Kermit Roosevelt Jr., grandson of U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt. It led to the overthrow of Mossadegh, who went on trial and was sentenced to house arrest, and restored and centralized power to Pahlavi. He would become the last Shah of Iran. The National Security Archive in 2013 officially acknowledged the U.S.'s role in the coup when it released declassified CIA documents on the operation. Learn more about Iran: 11 facts about the country following US strikes on three of its nuclear sites 'The 1953 coup remains a topic of global interest because so much about it is still under intense debate,' Malcolm Byrne of the National Security Archive wrote alongside the 2013 release. 'Even fundamental questions — who hatched the plot, who ultimately carried it out, who supported it inside Iran, and how did it succeed — are in dispute.' Journalist Stephen Kinzer said in his 2003 book 'All the Shah's Men' that the 1953 coup was a 'great trauma for Iran, the Middle East, and the colonial world,' marking the first time the U.S. overthrew a foreign government and altering how millions, especially in the region, saw the United States. How did the US-Iranian relationship play out after the coup? Iranians overthrew the Shah in 1979, and the Islamic revolutionaries who took over accused the CIA of having trained the Shah's secret police and vowed to battle Western imperialism in the region. They branded America 'the Great Satan,' a nickname that endures to this day. In November 1979, revolutionary students seized the American embassy and took dozens of diplomats and other staff hostage for more than a year. Known as the Iran hostage crisis, it marked the end of a strategic alliance between the U.S. and the Shah's regime, ushering in a new age of hostility between the two nations. The 1953 coup loomed large in the revolution's rhetoric. The lasting impact of the 1953 coup While the U.S. and Iran have butt heads over a range of issues since the 1979 revolution and hostage crisis, including years of strife over Iran's nuclear program, the 1953 coup remains a critical event still invoked in modern Iran. Iranian historian Ervand Abrahamian writes in his 2013 book about the crisis that the coup had lasting impacts on American foreign policy and U.S.-Iranian relations and cast its 'darkest shadow' over Iran itself. 'The coup left a deep imprint on the country—not only on its polity and economy but also on its popular culture and what some would call mentality,' Abrahamian said in 'The Coup.' Contributing: Swapna Venugopal Ramaswamy, USA TODAY; Reuters. Kathryn Palmer is a national trending news reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach her at kapalmer@ and on X @KathrynPlmr.
