Overnight, Israel launched strikes targeting Iranian nuclear facilities and military commanders. In a tweet, Israel’s prime minister described the attack as ‘a targeted military operation to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel’s very survival’ and said the operation will continue for ‘as many days as it takes to remove this threat’.
Following the attack, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei warned Israel faces a ‘bitter and painful’ response. Reports indicate that Iran has launched drones at Israel this morning. Below, Chatham House experts give their initial reaction to events.
Sanam Vakil, Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme:
The Israeli government has launched a highly provocative and strategically timed strike against Iran, aiming to achieve three primary objectives: to eliminate senior commanders and disrupt Iran’s operational leadership; to inflict damage on its nuclear program; and to weaken its defensive capabilities.
Beyond these immediate military goals, it is apparent that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu also seeks to sabotage any remaining diplomatic pathways toward a revived nuclear agreement and perhaps to incite internal unrest within Iran. The prime minister also has his domestic motivations.
Far from being a preventive action, this strike risks triggering a broader regional escalation and may inadvertently bolster the Islamic Republic’s domestic and international legitimacy.
Once again, Iran has been exposed, and its response options are constrained by its desire to avoid a full-scale war. Nonetheless, the regime must retaliate to reassert deterrence and prevent further strikes.
Iran has already launched a limited military response and cancelled the scheduled diplomatic talks with the Trump administration that were to be held on Sunday in Muscat. Given the unprecedented scale and nature of the Israeli attack, including strikes across Iranian territory and the targeting of civilians and senior officials, Tehran is likely to take further retaliatory steps. These may include accelerating its nuclear program, suspending all cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and potentially withdrawing from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
For now, Iran is unlikely to target Gulf infrastructure or assets, but should the situation continue to escalate, it may resort to broader regional measures.
Although the Trump administration has attempted to distance itself from the Israeli operation, it has simultaneously drawn a firm red line, warning that any attacks on US personnel or military installations will provoke a response. President Trump’s aspirations for a quick diplomatic breakthrough now appear dashed. Instead, the United States may find itself compelled to play a dual role: defending its Israeli ally while working to contain a rapidly deteriorating regional crisis.
Bronwen Maddox, Director of Chatham House: the Western response
The UK will almost certainly say something to back the US–Iran diplomatic talks that have now been interrupted and to call for calm.
Israel’s strike, ahead of this weekend’s round of negotiations, is clearly designed to scupper those talks. It also shows that Netanyahu is not much concerned with the views of Washington, which he appears to have disregarded.
The attacks will risk destabilizing the region, depending on Iran’s response. There is concern across the Gulf that Iran may choose to hit back not just at Israel but at neighbours who are close to the US. The strikes could also destabilize Syria, where the success of the new government – or otherwise – will affect the wider region.
Farea Al-Muslimi, research fellow, Middle East and North Africa Programme: the Houthi response
The Houthis in Yemen are poised to take a leading role in retaliating against Israel on Iran’s behalf. With Iran currently weakened and humiliated, this marks the first time the Houthis will be called upon to repay decades of Iranian investment and support.