Express View on US strikes on Iran: A defining, dangerous moment
US President Donald Trump's decision to join Israel's war against Iran on Sunday morning — with the bombing of three major nuclear facilities at Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz — could either force the Iranian regime to surrender or move decisively towards a wider war in the region. Although President Trump has claimed that the attacks have been successful, it will be a while before the full impact of the bombing of the nuclear sites in Iran will be known. Ground-level information will provide key inputs into understanding the extent of damage done to Iran's nuclear programme. Even more important is the nature of the political impact of the American bombing. Israel's war against Iran that began on June 13 had already done considerable damage to the regime and its structures, including the armed forces, intelligence establishment, and the nuclear scientific community. But the Iranian regime has managed to survive and has succeeded in hitting back against Israel. It remains to be seen if the American attacks mark a death blow to the regime or rally Iranian nationalism in favour of the Islamic Republic.
Trump's attacks have come well before the end of the two-week pause he had announced to explore, ostensibly, a peaceful resolution of the conflict between Iran and Israel. Cynics say the talk of a two-week time-out was a political feint. Since the announcement, the US has steadily mobilised a massive military force in the Gulf — including two aircraft carriers and several B-2 bombers that can deliver the bunker-buster munition to destroy the Fordow nuclear facility built deep inside a mountain. In a short statement on the bombing decision, Trump said the strikes are limited to destroying Iran's nuclear weapons capability and that the ball is now in Iran's court. If Iran sues for peace, there can be serious diplomacy for peace, he said. But if Iran seeks to widen the war by attacking the US or allied targets, Trump warned that more attacks will follow. All eyes will now be on Tehran's response.
It is no secret that Israel's goal has not been limited to a rollback of the Iranian nuclear programme, that it seeks a regime change in Tehran. Tel Aviv has long sought to bring the US into the war and leverage Washington's full weight to induce political change in Iran. Although Trump did not explicitly support the regime change objective, he made it clear that he seeks a change in the behaviour of the Islamic Republic. He seems to have left the Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with no option but to surrender and survive on Trump's terms. Within the US, the right-wing opponents of the war in Trump's political base are bound to be disappointed with the President's decision. They had mounted a serious campaign against the traditional temptation in Washington to intervene on Israel's side. They questioned the claim that Iran has built or is about to build nuclear weapons. They wanted the White House not to forget that previous efforts at regime change in Iraq and Libya had ended in disaster and cost the US much blood and treasure. Trump, however, appears to have calculated that total victory over Tehran is possible with a short and swift bombing campaign and that there would be no need for sending ground troops into Iran. It will not be long before the world sees either a familiar tragedy unfold in the Middle East or internal change in Iran that moves the region in a new direction.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
12 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Iran FM Araghchi issues warning to Trump after U.S. strikes on nuclear sites
Published on Jun 22, 2025 07:16 PM IST Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi delivered a fiery address condemning the U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear sites, calling the strikes 'outrageous' and warning of 'everlasting consequences' for American actions. Araghchi accused the U.S. of violating international law and the UN Charter, asserting Iran's right to defend its sovereignty by all means necessary. The speech came after President Trump announced successful strikes on the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities. Watch for more
Scroll.in
17 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
How the Israel-Iran conflict could impact India
On June 13, the Israeli military began striking what it claimed were nuclear targets and other sites in Iran, with the aim of stalling Tehran's nuclear programme. Iran retaliated with missile attacks on Israel. The official toll in Iran is at least 430 so far, while at least 25 persons have died in Israel. The continued exchange of fire has led to concerns of a wider regional conflict that the United States could get drawn into. Washington is an ally of Israel and acts as a guarantor of the country's security. Tehran has rejected US President Donald Trump's demand for an ' unconditional surrender ' and vowed to fight back. The prevailing uncertainty has led to a spike in global oil prices. The price of benchmark Brent crude had jumped to $78 per barrel by Thursday from $69 per barrel on June 12, the day before the conflict began. But the spike was not because of Israeli military's strikes reportedly on the Shahran oil depot in Tehran and one of Iran's largest refineries in Shahr Rey. These actions have little impact on Iranian energy exports. Instead, the spike in prices primarily stem from concerns about the possible blocking of the Strait of Hormuz amid the conflict. The closure could threaten global energy security. The chokepoint The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterbody that connects the Gulf to the Arabian Sea. In 2024, an average 20 million barrels of oil was transported through the strait every day. That was about one-fifth of global petroleum liquids consumption. This makes the Strait of Hormuz one of the most strategically important chokepoints. Iran has in the past threatened to block the waterbody in retaliation to pressure from the West. On Sunday, the Iranian Parliament decided that the Strait of Hormuz should be closed, state-run Press TV quoted lawmaker Major General Kowsari as saying. The final decision will be taken by the Supreme National Security Council, the member of the parliamentary national security commission added. Unlike other chokepoints such as the Suez Canal or the Strait of Malacca, there is no practical alternative for fuel supplies to bypass the Strait of Hormuz in large volumes. Cargo ships are already sailing closer to the Omani coast and have been advised by maritime agencies and governments to avoid Iranian waters in the Strait of Hormuz, Reuters reported on Wednesday. An attempt to shutter the strait will not go unchallenged because of the regional powers' strategic interest in keeping fuel supply open. But the ensuing military confrontation may still disrupt supplies to some extent. India's interest When Tel Aviv and Tehran last exchanged missile fire in October, former Indian diplomat Navdeep Suri had told Scroll that if the conflict escalated and became an all-out war, Iran, feeling threatened, had the capacity to block the Strait of Hormuz. In that case, New Delhi will be staring at a scenario that will 'directly impact India's energy security', he had said. 'A very large chunk of India's energy supplies come from there and that could really be serious for us,' explained Suri, who served as India's ambassador to the United Arab Emirates. 'It's in our interest that it doesn't get out of hand.' India consumes 5.5 million barrels of crude per day for refining. Of this, 1.5 million barrels come through the Strait of Hormuz, according to Union Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri. If the strait gets blocked, Amena Bakr, the head of Middle East and OPEC+ insights at analytics firm Kpler, told CNBC International on June 13 that oil prices could jump to three-digits. To put the impact of such a scenario into context: a spike of every $10 per barrel drives up inflation in India by about 0.5%, financial services company Morgan Stanley had estimated in April 2024. But Puri told NDTV that closing the strait was not in Iran's own interest. Yet, he said, India remained comfortably placed to meet its fuel needs, adding that New Delhi can tap into alternative supplies if needed. Here is a summary of the week's other top stories. Countering Trump's claims. Prime Minister Narendra Modi told United States President Donald Trump that India will never accept mediation to resolve tensions with Pakistan. The topic came up during a phone call when Trump asked for the details about India's military strikes – codenamed Operation Sindoor – on Pakistan in May, said Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri. Trump was told that India had agreed to the ceasefire only on Islamabad's request, said Misri. The 'halt to military action was directly between India and Pakistan', the foreign secretary quoted Modi as having reiterated. The call between the two leaders came against the backdrop of the US president repeatedly claiming that he helped settle the tensions between India and Pakistan. New Delhi has rejected Trump's assertions. , writes Rohan Venkataramakrishnan A thaw in relations. India and Canada agreed to reinstate high commissioners in each other's capitals. This was announced after Prime Minister Narendra Modi and his Canadian counterpart Mark Carney met on the sidelines of the Group of Seven summit. Other diplomatic steps 'to restore stability in the relationship' will 'follow in due course', said New Delhi. In October, New Delhi and Ottawa expelled several diplomats amid frosty bilateral relations. Ties between India and Canada strained in September 2023 after Justin Trudeau, the Canadian prime minister at the time, told his country's Parliament that intelligence agencies were actively pursuing 'credible allegations' tying agents of the Indian government to the murder of Khalistani separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada. New Delhi has rejected Canada's allegations. The language debate. Opposition leaders criticised Union Home Minister Amit Shah for saying that those who speak English in India will soon feel ashamed. Congress leader Rahul Gandhi said that English was 'not a barrier, but a bridge', adding that the language provides employment and boosts people's self-confidence. Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam MP Kanimozhi said to Shah that 'the only thing to be ashamed of is imposing your will on the people and trying to destroy the pluralism of India'. Shah's comment on Thursday came against the backdrop of several state governments and regional parties accusing the Union government of imposing Hindi through the National Education Policy's three-language formula. Also on Scroll this week for a curated selection of the news that matters throughout the day, and a round-up of major developments in India and around the world every evening. What you won't get: spam.
News18
18 minutes ago
- News18
Nobel Recommendation To Condemnation: How Iran Strikes Strain Pakistan's Ties With US
Last Updated: The country, which had recommended US President Donald Trump's name for the 2026 Nobel Peace prize on June 21, condemned the strikes on Tehran on June 22 The United States' strikes on the nuclear sites in Iran is a major diplomatic setback for Pakistan. The country, which had recommended US President Donald Trump's name for the 2026 Nobel Peace prize on June 21, condemned the strikes on Tehran on June 22. 'Pakistan condemns the US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities which follow the series of attacks by Israel. We are gravely concerned at the possible further escalation of tensions in the region," said Pakistan's Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar in an official statement. — Ishaq Dar (@MIshaqDar50) June 22, 2025 WHAT HAPPENED ON JUNE 21? Pakistan lauded Trump for his role in negotiating the May 2025 India-Pakistan ceasefire, a move they believed demonstrated his commitment to peace. India has maintained that the US had no role in putting Operation Sindoor on halt and that the ceasefire was agreed upon based on Pakistan's request. Pakistan's Army Chief Asim Munir's White House meeting with Trump on June 18 also signalled closer ties. 'Pakistan's nomination of Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize was not just a symbolic gesture. It was a strategic effort to secure the U.S. support on key issues such as the Kashmir conflict and economic cooperation in emerging sectors like cryptocurrency and critical minerals," said intelligence sources. Analysts said Pakistan was also attempting to appeal to Trump's ego in the hope of dissuading him from taking aggressive action against Iran, thus maintaining regional stability and gaining leverage in their ongoing diplomatic efforts. WHAT HAPPENED ON JUNE 22? The U.S. strikes on June 22 have put Pakistan in a precarious position. The country, which shares a 900-km border with Iran, relies heavily on Tehran for trade, security, and the stability of its Shia community, which constitutes 15-20% of its population. The escalation threatens to destabilise Balochistan, a region already plagued by separatist movements, and could potentially embolden Sunni jihadist groups like Jaish al-Adl. While Tehran has refrained from publicly criticising Pakistan, the trust between the two neighbours is undoubtedly strained. Indian intelligence sources said Pakistan's diplomatic manoeuvre with the Nobel nomination was fraught with risks, given its significant dependence on Iran. The fallout from the U.S. strikes underscores Islamabad's limited influence in the broader U.S.-Iran conflict and highlights the fragility of its multi-alignment strategy. 'Moving forward, Pakistan faces the daunting task of balancing its relationships with both Tehran and Washington. This requires deft diplomacy to navigate an increasingly complex geopolitical landscape, a challenge that appears near-impossible amid the current crises," said sources.
