The Trump administration has shown a willingness to resume negotiations with Iran following a military operation that targeted three of the nation’s nuclear facilities. This shift comes in the context of a surprise attack, as U.S. officials assess Tehran’s nuclear ambitions and the potential for retaliation against American interests.
Coordinated messages from President Donald Trump’s vice president, military leaders, and Secretary of State indicate a level of confidence that the fallout from the attacks could be managed. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated at a news briefing that the U.S. “does not seek war” with Iran, suggesting that the strikes might open the door for renewed diplomatic dialogue.
Vice President JD Vance noted that the attacks provide Tehran the chance to return to the negotiating table with Washington. “This mission was not and has not been about regime change,” Hegseth emphasized, presenting a stance focused more on diplomacy than military escalation.
However, the situation remains precarious as Iran possesses various options for retaliation, which could heighten tensions in the Middle East and have global implications. Iran could potentially disrupt oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, strike U.S. military bases, engage in cyber warfare, or intensify its nuclear program in response to the U.S. strikes.
These developments raise critical questions about whether the military actions will lead to further violence or rekindle negotiations out of a desire for caution.
Domestically, the attack seeped into political discourse, with Trump devoting time on social media to address his critics. He responded to Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., who opposed military action without congressional authorization, by proclaiming the military operation a “spectacular success”.
Trump had previously declared the military operation succeeded in neutralizing the threat from Iran, stating, “We took the ‘bomb’ right out of their hands (and they would use it if they could)!”
In a joint briefing at the Pentagon, Hegseth, along with Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, detailed the operation named “Operation Midnight Hammer”. Hegseth noted that the mission involved various tactics including deception and that there was no Iranian military resistance during the attack.
General Caine claimed that the objectives—destroying key nuclear sites located in Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan—had been successfully achieved. He reported, “Initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction.”
Vice President Vance echoed these sentiments in a CNN interview, suggesting that the strikes had significantly delayed Iran’s nuclear progress. He expressed confidence that the development of a nuclear weapon by Iran would be postponed for many years as a result of the airstrikes.
The Vice President remarked that previous negotiations had been vigorous in an effort to find a peaceful resolution. He explained, “I actually think it provides an opportunity to reset this relationship, reset these negotiations and get us in a place where Iran can decide not to be a threat to its neighbors, not to be a threat to the United States.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio underscored that no additional military operations against Iran were planned at the moment unless Iran attacked U.S. interests.
Historically, Trump has issued threats towards other nations but often retreated from military escalation, having pledged not to embroil the U.S. in prolonged conflicts. It remains to be seen whether Iran believes avoiding a broader conflict aligns with its interests.
As the global community absorbs the implications of the strikes, there are concerns over potential escalations in the Middle Eastern conflicts. The U.S. intervention follows earlier Israeli airstrikes targeting Iranian nuclear sites and military leaders, which triggered retaliatory responses from Tehran, culminating in the U.S. attack.
Though U.S. officials maintained that the strikes were focused exclusively on nuclear sites, Iran condemned the actions as a breach of its sovereignty and an infringement of international law. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the U.S. bore full responsibility for any future actions taken by Tehran in retaliation.
“They crossed a very big red line by attacking nuclear facilities,” Araghchi said, questioning the feasibility of continued diplomatic relations.
Moreover, global reactions have poured in, with both China and Russia denouncing the U.S. military actions. The Russian Foreign Ministry labeled the strikes as “a gross violation of international law” and expressed the necessity for returning to a political and diplomatic resolution of the situation. In a similar vein, Turkey’s foreign ministry cautioned about the risks of the conflict escalating to a global dimension.
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer noted that the UK was deploying military assets to the region in order to safeguard its interests and ensure the safety of allies. His office remarked that he had briefed Trump on the importance of urging Tehran to resume negotiations.
The leaders of Italy, Germany, Canada, and France echoed the need for swift resumption of negotiations with Iran, while French President Emmanuel Macron engaged in discussions with regional leaders to facilitate dialogue.
As tensions heighten, Iran may consider obstructing oil exports through the strategically crucial Strait of Hormuz, potentially leading to economic impacts similar to those witnessed following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The aftermath of increased military activity has already caused oil prices to rise by 21% amid fears of instability within the region.
During the Pentagon briefing, Trump’s administration clarified that the timeline for the military strikes was determined in part by the president’s schedule for diplomatic discussions with Iran. Hegseth remarked that when Trump signals a period of negotiation—as he termed a 60-day ceasefire—it is clear that this timeframe is definitive.
Despite the administration’s claims, prior indications suggested that determining the course of action against Iran could take two weeks, bringing some ambiguity to the timeline. However, the U.S. capitalized on Iran’s compromised air defenses, enabling the strikes without encountering pushback.
Caine reported, “Iran’s fighters did not fly, and it appears that Iran’s surface to air missile systems did not see us throughout the mission.”
Hegseth indicated that a recent decision to relocate B-2 bombers was intended as a diversion tactic to confuse Iranian defenses, complemented by other deception methods used during the operation. Caine disclosed that a total of 14 bunker-buster bombs were utilized in the attacks on Fordo and Natanz nuclear sites.
The strikes were executed on Saturday evening in Washington between 6:40 p.m. and 7:05 p.m., translating to approximately 2:10 a.m. on Sunday in Iran, marking a significant military escalation in the region.
image source from：nbcwashington
