In a dramatic escalation of Middle Eastern tensions, the United States (US) executed a major military operation against Iran's nuclear programme on 21 June 2025, at precisely 10:56AM Indian standard time (IST). The coordinated assault targeted three critical Iranian nuclear installations—Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan—marking a significant intensification of the ongoing regional conflict that has been building since Israel's initial strikes against Iranian facilities.
President Donald Trump characterised the operation as an unprecedented 'spectacular military success,' boldly declaring that Iran's nuclear enrichment capabilities had been 'completely and totally obliterated.' The president emphasised the historic nature of the moment, stating on his Truth Social platform that no other military force in the world possessed the capability to execute such a complex operation. He called for Iran to agree to end the war and proclaimed this as "a historic moment for the United States of America, Israel, and the World."
Extent of Damage to Iran's Nuclear Sites
The US military operation involved B-2 stealth bombers and bunker-busting bombs, including the GBU-57A/B massive ordnance penetrator (MOP), designed to penetrate fortified underground facilities. Additionally, 30 Tomahawk missiles were fired from Navy submarines at Natanz and Isfahan. President Trump, in an address on 21 June 2025, claimed that the strikes 'completely and totally obliterated' Iran's key nuclear enrichment capacity, targeting sites vital to uranium enrichment which had reached about 60% purity, close to weapons-grade levels.
Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised president Trump's decision as demonstrating 'peace through strength,' asserting that the action would fundamentally alter the course of history. Netanyahu emphasised that while Israel's Operation Rising Lion had achieved remarkable results, America's intervention represented something unprecedented that no other nation could accomplish. The Israeli leader expressed confidence that MrTrump's leadership had created a pivotal moment that could guide the Middle East toward prosperity and peace.
Despite the bold proclamations from American leadership, independent verification of the claimed destruction remains elusive. Iran's atomic agency has condemned what it terms a 'savage assault' while vowing to continue its nuclear programme, despite the attacks. The International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) most recent public assessment, released on 20 June, detailed damage from previous Israeli strikes but has not yet provided analysis of the American bombardment's effects.
The challenge of accurately assessing damage is compounded by the sophisticated design of these facilities. The Fordow installation, buried between 80 to 90 meters underground, and Natanz's subterranean structures were specifically engineered to withstand military assault. This defensive architecture raises questions about whether the damage is as comprehensive as claimed, or whether Iran maintains redundant capabilities that could allow programme continuation.
The lack of post-strike IAEA updates as of 22 June 2025, suggests that the full extent of damage is still being assessed. Experts note that bombing nuclear sites could lead to internal contamination and chemical toxicity, particularly from uranium isotopes and hydrogen fluoride, but the risk of a Chernobyl-like disaster is low . Thus, while the US claims total destruction, the evidence leans toward significant but potentially incomplete damage, with Iran's ability to rebuild or continue its programme uncertain.
Morteza Heydari, spokesman for the Qom Provincial Crisis Management Headquarters, acknowledged that air defences were activated and hostile targets identified before enemy airstrikes hit part of the nuclear site.
Likely Fallout
Iran's official response has been swift and uncompromising. In his first public statement following the strikes, foreign minister Abbas Araghchi delivered a sharp condemnation via social media, accusing the US of committing a grave violation of the United Nations (UN) Charter, international law, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty by attacking what Iran characterises as peaceful nuclear installations. Araghchi emphasised that the US, as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, had engaged in "extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior" that should alarm every member of the UN. He declared the morning's events 'outrageous' with consequences that would be 'everlasting,' while asserting that Iran "reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people."
The strikes have likely heightened tensions in the Middle East, with Iran vowing to reserve all options for defense, including potential retaliation through proxies like Hezbollah or direct military action. Economically, the strikes have raised concerns about oil price spikes, given Iran's role as a major oil producer. Reports indicate that investors have reacted with caution, with cryptocurrencies like Ether falling over 5% and bitcoin dipping 1% post-announcement . The broader market volatility reflects fears of regional instability affecting global energy markets.
The strikes have effectively complicated any near-term prospects for diplomatic resolution. Iran's historical reluctance to engage in negotiations under military pressure suggests that peaceful resolution may become increasingly difficult. IAEA has expressed particular concern about the inherent risks of attacking nuclear facilities, noting that such actions could potentially trigger radioactive releases with severe consequences for regional populations.
International Diplomatic Response
The global reaction has revealed deep divisions in the international community, largely reflecting existing geopolitical alignments and strategic interests.
Russian president Vladimir Putin has criticised the American action, emphasising that military solutions cannot resolve disputes over Iran's nuclear programme and calling for immediate de-escalation.
China's president Xi Jinping has similarly urged major powers to exercise restraint and work toward a ceasefire, implicitly referencing American involvement in the escalation.
UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres has expressed profound concern about the strikes, warning that they risk creating a 'spiral into chaos' and urging all parties to return to diplomatic negotiations. His statement reflects broader international anxiety about the potential for uncontrolled escalation in one of the world's most volatile regions
India Today.
Latin American nations have largely condemned the military action while advocating for diplomatic solutions. Mexico's foreign affairs ministry issued an urgent appeal for diplomatic dialogue aimed at achieving peace, while Cuban president Miguel Díaz-Canel warned that the attack could potentially draw the entire world into crisis. Colombia and Chile have similarly called for peaceful negotiations rather than military escalation.
South Korea has convened emergency meetings to assess the broader implications of the conflict, particularly regarding security and economic impacts on the region. Some traditional American allies, including the United Kingdom, have offered support for the action, though constitutional concerns have been raised by some American lawmakers regarding the decision-making process.
Likelihood of Other Countries Joining the War
The likelihood of other countries joining the war militarily appears low based on current reactions. Russia and China, key allies of Iran, have condemned the US strikes but have not indicated any intention to intervene militarily. Russia has warned of the risks of wider destabilisation but is focused on diplomatic efforts, offering to mediate the conflict . Its strategic partnership with Iran lacks a mutual defense clause, limiting direct involvement. China, while critical, is prioritising economic stability and has called for a cease-fire, emphasising diplomatic solutions .
Other countries, such as those in Latin America, have criticised the strikes but are focused on peace talks, with no indication of military involvement. For example, Mexico and Cuba have urged dialogue and condemned the action, but their statements suggest a preference for diplomacy over escalation . Some US allies, like Israel, have supported the strikes, but there is no evidence of other nations preparing to join the conflict militarily.
Given the focus on de-escalation by major powers and the lack of mutual defense commitments, it seems unlikely that Russia, China, or other countries will join the war, at least in the immediate term. The situation remains fluid, with potential for escalation if Iran retaliates, but current indications suggest a preference for diplomatic resolution.
The diplomatic landscape has become increasingly complex, with the strikes potentially complicating efforts to restart nuclear negotiations with Iran. The historical pattern of Iranian reluctance to engage diplomatically under military pressure suggests that peaceful resolution may become more challenging in the immediate aftermath of the military action.
