Early Friday, Israel launched a series of air strikes against Iran, focusing on the country’s nuclear facilities and resulting in the deaths of high-ranking military officials and nuclear scientists.
This military action comes as Israel expresses deep concerns over Iran’s advancing nuclear program, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declaring that the operation aims to ‘roll back the Iranian threat to Israel’s survival.’
Ahead of these strikes, negotiations were underway between the U.S. and Iran, seeking an agreement that would have led Iran to scale down its nuclear ambitions in exchange for a lift on U.S. sanctions that have significantly burdened Iran’s economy. Despite Iran’s insistence that its nuclear program is not aimed at developing a weapon, Netanyahu maintains that military action is the only effective way to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
In the aftermath of the Israeli strikes, Iran retaliated by launching over 100 drones towards Israel and has warned of further military escalation in the region.
Following the attack, Iran declared it would not participate in scheduled talks with the U.S. that were set for Sunday.
Trita Parsi, a U.S.-Iranian relations expert and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, shared insights into the Israeli strikes during a Morning Edition interview with NPR’s Michel Martin. Parsi emphasized that Israel has historically sought to undermine any diplomatic efforts between the U.S. and Iran, fearing that any improvement in U.S.-Iran relations would not lessen Israeli-Iranian tensions.
‘For more than 20 years, the Israelis have tried to sabotage any diplomacy between the United States and Iran,’ Parsi noted.
Israel’s actions were characterized as a decisive move in its military strategy, according to Israel’s UN Ambassador Danny Danon during a subsequent interview. Danon described the strikes as an ‘independent decision of Israel’ made in the spirit of self-defense, especially following intelligence that alleged Iran had sufficient material for multiple nuclear weapons.
Danon articulated, ‘After October 7th, we learned that we are not going to wait for our enemies to surprise us again.’ As such, the targets were chosen not only for their nuclear significance but also for Iran’s development of ballistic missile technology.
When questioned about the specific claims regarding Iran’s nuclear program, Danon asserted that intelligence indicated a military program that was deliberately concealed from the international community. ‘They were moving forward,’ he stated, emphasizing Israel’s belief in Iran’s threats, especially regarding its intentions towards Israel.
Meanwhile, Parsi offered a different perspective on the implications of the strikes, suggesting that they may well lead to an intensification of Iran’s nuclear pursuits. He contended that acts of aggression typically do not discourage nations from seeking deterrents. ‘Nothing really strengthens your desire for nuclear deterrence than actually being attacked,’ he argued, warning that the likelihood of Iran departing from the Non-Proliferation Treaty and advancing towards developing a bomb is now a significant risk.
Parsi further critiqued the U.S. approach under President Donald Trump, suggesting that the strikes were coordinated with Israeli interests and that a green light had been given for military action amidst a shifting U.S. stance toward negotiations.
‘Under President Trump, there was a move from merely limiting Iran’s nuclear program to pursuing its complete elimination, which was unrealistic and led to deadlock in negotiations. Instead, Trump seems to be allowing Israeli actions in hopes of changing Iran’s negotiating position,’ Parsi explained.
As tensions escalate, both Israel and Iran appear to be in a precarious position, with military actions threatening to unravel years of diplomatic efforts. With the future of U.S.-Iran negotiations cast into uncertainty, regional security remains increasingly fragile.
The unfolding crisis marks a significant moment in Middle Eastern geopolitics, prompting global leaders to step back and assess the risks of further military engagement in a region already fraught with conflict.
image source from：https://www.npr.org/2025/06/13/nx-s1-5432480/israel-iran-war-trump
