Iran has embarked on a retaliatory campaign in response to Israel’s sweeping aerial strikes aimed at its nuclear facilities and targeted assassinations of senior military officials. Experts caution that this escalation risks drawing the United States into a burgeoning conflict in the region.
On Friday night, loud explosions echoed across Israel, prompting officials to advise the public to seek shelter as the military confirmed the launch of missiles from Iranian territory. According to Iran’s Islamic Republic News Agency, hundreds of ballistic missiles were fired in what it termed a “hard retaliation.”
The severity of the Israeli attack was notable; around 200 Israeli fighter jets targeted one of Iran’s primary uranium enrichment sites and executed strikes in Tehran, reportedly leading to the deaths of numerous high-ranking military personnel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has committed to further actions against Iran.
In light of Israel’s aggressive strikes, experts indicate that Iran finds itself with limited options, particularly after suffering a series of Israeli attacks over the past year that have significantly disrupted its military leadership and capabilities.
Some analysts foresee a scenario where Iran retaliates not just against Israeli targets but also against international Jewish sites, U.S. allies in the Gulf region, and even American interests. This strategy could compel the United States to react and deepen its involvement in the conflict.
“From the Iranian perspective, this is a declaration of war from the Israeli side,” Ellie Geranmayeh, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, remarked. “The Israelis have surpassed all the rules of engagement between the two countries as they stood.”
Despite Netanyahu’s assertion that the attacks were necessary to neutralize Iran’s nuclear threat, they received condemnation from various global actors, including European and Middle Eastern powers, certain U.S. lawmakers, and the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The sentiment within Iran is one of urgency, with many believing that retaliation must occur now. Geranmayeh pointed out fears that senior figures eliminated in the recent attacks—coupled with speculation about the safety of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei—could prompt immediate action.
The broader implications of these developments cannot be overstated. Burcu Ozcelik, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, commented on the situation, stating, “Pandora’s box has been cast wide open.” She noted that the subsequent actions could redefine regional security for many years to come.
Despite being weakened, Iran maintains a vast arsenal, including the Middle East’s largest inventory of ballistic and cruise missiles as well as drones. Estimates suggest Iran possesses approximately 3,000 ballistic missiles alone, according to the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control.
The focus now shifts toward how Iran intends to deploy its military resources—whether exclusively against Israeli targets or if it will also extend its reach toward U.S. interests.
American military bases are strategically placed in Iraq, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Bahrain, heightening the stakes for U.S. involvement. President Donald Trump has made it clear that he supports Israel’s military actions.
In a recent post on Truth Social, he emphasized the United States’ military superiority, stating, “The United States makes the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the World, BY FAR, and that Israel has a lot of it, with much more to come.”
In anticipation of potential danger in the region, prior to the Israeli strikes, Trump announced the relocation of certain personnel. Following the attacks, the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad issued a warning to Americans in the Middle East to remain cautious and to be aware of shelter locations in the event of conflict.
The U.S. has distanced itself from Israel’s strikes, asserting that Israel acted independently, while still planning to proceed with talks in Oman focused on curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions—a claim Tehran asserts it does not pursue.
Despite this detachment, Trump has not minimized the situation’s urgency. He highlighted the implications of the recent violence in his social media commentary, arguing it could lead to a significant conflict should diplomatic progress remain stalled.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio affirmed the U.S. involvement in the region while clarifying that the U.S. had no hand in the Israeli attacks. Iran, however, asserts that logistical support from the U.S. was integral to these military actions.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi echoed this view, stating that it was implausible for Israel to conduct such extensive attacks without coordination with the U.S.
Vali R. Nasr, a professor at Johns Hopkins University, expressed skepticism about Israel’s ability to act unilaterally. He noted the improbability of an operation of this scale occurring without U.S. approval or knowledge.
Should Iran pursue retaliation against American interests, analysts forecast increased tensions in Iraq or the Gulf. However, this approach may be mitigated by Iran’s recent diplomatic overtures toward former adversaries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Despite Israel’s superior military capabilities, Netanyahu faces a precarious situation. Experts believe that while Israel can inflict considerable damage, it lacks the means to fully dismantle Iran’s nuclear program without U.S. support.
Israeli defenses have consistently demonstrated the ability to initiate conflict; however, experts agree that a comprehensive resolution is beyond their sole capability.
In summary, as Rouzbeh Parsi of the Swedish Institute of International Affairs pointed out, “Israel has always been capable of starting this war. But it has been equally clear that it cannot finish it on its own.”
image source from：https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/israel-attack-iran-middle-east-us-pandora-box-strikes-retaliation-rcna212798
