In a dramatic overnight move, the United States has struck three Iranian nuclear sites, setting off a wave of condemnation, anxiety, and uncertainty across the Middle East and beyond.
President Donald Trump, speaking just hours after the attack, called the strikes a “success,” saying the targeted facilities had been “obliterated.” The action marks a stark escalation in the already fraught standoff between Iran, Israel, and the West — and throws months of fragile diplomacy into disarray.
The strikes, carried out late last night, hit Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan — all central to Iran’s controversial nuclear programme. One of the most sensitive targets was Fordo, a heavily fortified uranium enrichment site buried deep in a mountain south of Tehran.
“Only the US has the kind of weapon that can reach it,” said one Western defence analyst. That weapon is believed to be the GBU-57, a 13,000-kilogram “bunker buster” bomb designed to break through reinforced underground facilities. Multiple US outlets have reported that the bomb was deployed in the raid, though the Pentagon has not officially confirmed this.
Iran’s Atomic Energy Organisation denounced the strikes as a “barbaric violation” of international law. But Iran was quick to downplay the damage.
Speaking on state TV, Hassan Abedini, deputy head of Iran’s state broadcaster, said, “We evacuated the sites some time ago. The materials had already been removed. There was no major blow.”
Still, the symbolic weight of the strikes is immense.
Within hours, Iran launched missiles at Israel. Officials in Tel Aviv said at least 16 people were injured in Haifa and parts of the capital. The attack, although expected, highlights the growing risk of a broader regional war.
A Question of Retaliation
Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araqchi, condemned the US action, warning of consequences.
“This is an outrageous and unprecedented breach of the UN Charter,” he told journalists in Tehran. “The United States has crossed a red line.”
Iran now faces a choice: retaliate swiftly, wait for the dust to settle, or take a diplomatic route.
According to BBC Security Correspondent Frank Gardner, Tehran may opt to hit US military bases in the region or strike indirectly through proxy forces. “Iran has options,” he said, “but each path carries its own dangers.”
The Trump Factor
The strikes have added new urgency to America’s political debate.
Appearing on national television flanked by his top officials, Trump warned, “There are many targets left. Iran must choose peace or face greater consequences.”
His base has largely backed him. “I commend President Trump for standing up to Iran,” said Senator Ted Cruz of Texas. But not all Republicans are on board.
Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, a vocal Trump ally, posted: “This is not our fight.”
Across the aisle, Democrats have expressed alarm. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries warned of a “potentially disastrous entanglement” in another Middle East war. Senator Bernie Sanders called the strikes “grossly unconstitutional,” reminding Americans that only Congress can authorise war.
Still, under the US Constitution, a president can order military action without a formal declaration — a power many presidents have used, controversially, before.
World Reaction: Warnings and Appeals
Global leaders were quick to respond. UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer supported the US action, saying it was aimed at preventing a greater threat. But others were less sympathetic.
UN Secretary General António Guterres said the strikes were “deeply concerning,” urging both sides to de-escalate. The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, echoed that, calling for an urgent return to negotiations.
From the Gulf, Saudi Arabia expressed “great concern,” while Oman condemned the strikes outright. India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he had spoken to Iran’s new president and called for “dialogue and diplomacy.”
A Long-Simmering Crisis
Tensions had already reached a boiling point before the strikes.
On 13 June, Israel carried out a surprise assault on dozens of Iranian nuclear and military facilities. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed Iran was “months away” from building a bomb.
Iran has repeatedly denied this. Its leadership insists the nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes — an argument Western powers remain deeply sceptical of.
After Israel’s attack, Tehran retaliated with hundreds of rockets and drones. Now, the US has entered the fray in the most direct way yet.
Notably, only days before the airstrikes, Trump had given Iran a two-week deadline to enter fresh nuclear talks. The bombs fell less than 48 hours later.
What Now?
The path ahead is anything but clear.
There is no public evidence yet of nuclear contamination or casualties. The UN’s nuclear watchdog, the IAEA, confirmed radiation levels remained stable after the attacks.
But diplomatic fallout is already spreading. Analysts warn that unless all sides step back, the world could be facing a dangerous new chapter in the Middle East — one where diplomacy grows weaker, and weapons do the talking.
For now, the world watches. And waits.
