‘Prolonged campaign' could be on the cards for Israelis as Iranian nuclear research facility is hit
Iranians hit back with missile strikes, while US begins 'assisted departure flights' from Israel
Today at 21:30
Israel's military said yesterday it was preparing for the possibility of a lengthy war, and announced it struck an Iranian nuclear research facility overnight while also killing three senior Iranian commanders in targeted attacks.
The prospect of a wider war was also threatened. Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen said they would resume attacks on US vessels and warships in the Red Sea if the Trump administration joins Israel's military campaign against Iran. The Houthis paused such attacks last month under a deal with the US.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
The Irish Times view on the US attacks on Iran: Trump's biggest gamble
Donald Trump's bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan has made the world a significantly more dangerous place. As UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres rightly warns, the strikes are a 'dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security.' He said there was 'a growing risk that this conflict could rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world.' Although Trump claims that the strikes have successfully 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear programme , their ostensible sole and arguably welcome purpose, it is clear that he does not now intend to disengage. Israel has, as it has hoped for some time, acquired a formidable partner whose continued commitment will be assured by Iran's inevitable retaliation at US targets. 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,' Trump warned. 'If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.' Israel's purpose, unlike the US, in launching its attack was never solely the disabling of the infrastructure of a nuclear weapons programme. Its objective, largely unstated, has always been the regime in Tehran itself. It has no intention of leaving the job half done. The leader of Israel's parliamentary opposition, Yair Lapid, a committed critic of prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, yesterday backed the US attack: 'It was the right and correct thing for Israel, Israeli security and global security. It's a good moment.' But rightly added that Israel should now aim to wrap up the war with Iran, saying that its 'main objectives had been achieved.' Netanyahu is unlikely to listen. READ MORE Regime change is likely to prove difficult with unpredictable consequences as the US should have learned in Afghanistan and Iraq. Although the US strikes are clearly in breach of international law, most western capitals while emphasising that they were not involved, and appealing for 'de-escalation', have dodged the issue to avoid antagonising Trump. Not so his Democratic opponents in the US, who are complaining bitterly that once again the president has ignored the constitutional limits of presidential power by usurping Congress's authority to declare war. Within the ranks of his MAGA movement sharp divisions are also opening up between those who signed up because of his promise to pull America out of all 'forever wars', and those who will back him whatever he does. And the polls are showing the president's performance rating sliding, By attacking Iran, Trump has taken a huge gamble in what is a defining moment for his presidency. The consequences are uncertain and the risks that it could all backfire are substantial.
Irish Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
Group of 15 Irish citizens evacuated from Israel
A group of 15 Irish citizens were successfully assisted in departing Israel on Sunday. They are expected to arrive in Ireland in the coming days after an EU partner organised their departure. The Department of Foreign Affairs asks Irish citizens in Iran and Israel to remain vigilant, to monitor developments and media, and to follow advice from the authorities, including when this is to shelter in place. Tánaiste and Foreign Affairs Minister Simon Harris said: "Our Embassies will remain in close contact with all citizens in Israel and Iran over the days and weeks ahead. Our wider political work on the developing situation also continues." The Tánaiste said he spoke to Iran's deputy foreign minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi on Sunday. He continued: "During the call, I expressed grave concern at the developments overnight, strongly urged restraint and shared the view that it was not in the interests of the Iranian people or the Middle East as a region for hostilities to escalate. "I stressed the importance of Iran engaging in formal processes to de-escalate and said there is eagerness on the part of the EU and the E3 countries to be helpful in relation to these processes and to remain engaged in dialogue at this key time. "Ireland's perspective on this matter comes from our long track record of support for nuclear disarmament, our recent role on the UN Security Council dealing with the Iran file and the strong belief that concerns about Iran's nuclear programme should be addressed through dialogue." The Tánaiste is due to meet his EU counterparts in Brussels on Monday to discuss the evolving situation. He added: "Our work to encourage dialogue, diplomacy and deescalation will continue."
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
US-Iran: Unclear what comes next after Donald Trump's riskiest foreign policy action as president
The news broke on Saturday evening as a sweltering heat belt settled across the central and eastern sections of the United States . A bombing strike had been launched on Iranian nuclear bunkers. US president Donald Trump would address the nation at ten o'clock that evening. Only a few days earlier, on Wednesday, Trump had been puckish about his intentions towards Iran. 'I may do. I may not do knows what I am going to do.' Now, the world knew. When he spoke, flanked by vice-president JD Vance, secretary of state Marco Rubio and defence secretary Pete Hegseth, it was in the knowledge that militarily, the immaculately planned bombing raid on the three key Iranian nuclear targets in Natanz, Isfahan and the most critical target in Fordow had been a glittering success. Trump, with his customary gusto, announced Iran's nuclear capabilities had been 'obliterated'. The action ended the will-he-won't-he question mark over a president who had campaigned vociferously last year on a platform which would end the Russia-Ukraine conflict and restore peace in the Middle East. READ MORE Instead, after opening his second term by issuing vague threats to claim Greenland and seeking to re-order global trade patterns with on-again-off-again tariff sections, Trump move decisively against Iran with a series of strikes. His administration insists those actions can usher in a new set of parameters through which White House negotiators can broker peace. But even as Secretary Hegseth emphasised the military accomplishment of the Midnight Hammer operation, which was the largest B2 spirit bomber and the second longest B2 mission ever flown, the mission raised a blizzard of new questions. The most obvious revolves around the uncertainty over how Iran, and the 86-year old Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, will respond to the US act of aggression , which complements the recent series of Israeli attacks that killed key Iranian generals and nuclear scientists. The US has warned Iran against retaliatory attacks on its bases in the region, with general Dan Caine, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, warning that a counter-attack, or proxy attacks, would represent 'an incredibly poor choice' of response on the part of Iran. Convincing Trump to withdraw from a deal was a diplomatic victory for Israel's prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu Within hours, the domestic response to the attacks was sharply divided along political lines. Republican lawmakers, with the conspicuous exception of Kentucky's Thomas Massie, uniformly praised the decisiveness and success of the operation. Democratic representatives emphasised that the depth of damage caused by the strikes had yet to be fully determined and warned that the decision greatly escalates the risk. Connecticut representative Jim Himes, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, stated on Sunday that Trump 'has just taken an enormous, enormous gamble. And if history matters – Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, gambles in the Middle East very rarely go the way you expect or even hope they might go.' Perhaps the clearest indication of Trump's intentions were contained within his public rebuke days ago of Tulsi Gabbard, his director of national intelligence, when he flatly declared 'she's wrong' in relation to her March testimony that Iran was not in the process of building a nuclear weapon. [ US-Iran: Nobody, including Trump, knows what will happen next Opens in new window ] On Friday, Gabbard contradicted her position in response to Trump's criticism, stating on social media: 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months.' The strikes draw renewed attention to Trump's decision, in 2018, to withdraw from the nuclear agreement the US had entered into with Iran during president Barack Obama's administration in 2015. Convincing Trump to withdraw from a deal was a diplomatic victory for Israel's prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who has spent decades issuing warnings to the effect that Iran is on the cusp of nuclear capability. The Israeli leader was arguably the one person more exultant about the US intervention on Saturday night. Sceptics noted that for a full year afterwards, Iran remained in compliance with the terms of that shredded agreement. In 2020, Trump approved what was the boldest military action of his first term in office: the targeted assassination of Qasem Soleimani, the prominent military leader. That provocation drew a limited Iranian response, with missile launches at Iraqi bases where US forces were stationed. It remains to be seen how it will respond to what stands as Trump's boldest and riskiest foreign policy action as president.
