June 13, 2025

SHARE |

Tensions Escalate as Israel Attacks Iran

AP Photo/Vahid Salemi

Tensions in the Persian Gulf and broader Middle East escalated dramatically on Thursday when Israel undertook what it said was a “preemptive” attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. Israeli leaders stated more such attacks would follow. According to reports and Iranian state media late Thursday night, Brigadier General Mohammad Bagheri, chief of staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, Hossein Salami, commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), and other top Iranian officials and nuclear scientists were believed to be killed in the strikes; the deaths might complicate Iran’s efforts to retaliate.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei responded stating that Israel should brace itself for a “harsh punishment.” Other Iranian officials have also blamed the U.S. for the Israeli strike, despite some U.S. officials stating that they were not involved but were informed that Israel was taking this action to ensure Iran does not develop a nuclear weapon. Other reports quoted U.S. officials as saying Trump had advanced knowledge of the Israeli action and did not pressure Netanyahu to call the attack off. The perception of advanced U.S. knowledge suggests Iran might retaliate against U.S. as well as Israeli targets. As of Thursday night, Israel had begun taking precautions for an Iranian response, with some hospitals across the country discharging non-emergent patients and preparing for a possible emergency response.

The Israeli attack preceded comments by U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday disparaging Iran’s nuclear negotiating posture and casting doubt that U.S.-Iran talks on a new nuclear agreement, which began in mid-April, would yield an accord. Trump told U.S. media that the Iranians had become “much more aggressive” in the talks, reflecting statements by Khamenei rejecting a U.S. proposal for Iran to cede full control of its uranium enrichment program. The U.S. offer, submitted to Iran two weeks ago by Special Envoy for the Middle East Steven Witkoff, envisions formation of a regional consortium, consisting of Iran, the U.S., Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and possibly Türkiye and Qatar, that would enrich uranium to fuel civilian nuclear power reactors region wide.

Trump’s Wednesday comments were widely interpreted by Iran, Israel, and the Arab Gulf and other regional states – perhaps inaccurately – as indication Trump would no longer restrain Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu from proceeding with an Israeli attack on Iran’s main uranium enrichment sites. Israeli media had reported on Monday that, in a tense phone call that day on the Iran issue as well as the situation in Gaza, Trump again insisted there should be no further U.S.-Israeli discussions on striking Iran until U.S. officials determine that the nuclear talks have failed. But, Israeli media cited two sources familiar with the phone call as saying Netanyahu did not receive a clear answer from Trump as to whether the U.S. would give Israel a “green light” to act alone against Iran. Before the Thursday strike, Israeli officials acknowledged their forces had been placed on “high alert" in recent days for possible escalation with Iran.

Phone conversations by Trump and Netanyahu, in advance of the Israeli attack, occurred as the week-long quarterly meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) began in Vienna. Iranian leaders issued veiled warnings of potential consequences should the U.S. and European states proceed with their stated intent to push through an IAEA censure motion against Iran at the meeting. The censure initiative represented a reaction to a May 30 “comprehensive” IAEA report which stated that Iran had dramatically increased its stockpile of 60 percent enriched uranium since the previous quarter. On Wednesday, the IAEA Board of Governors adopted that censure motion, citing Iran for violating its Safeguards Agreement with the Agency, which Iran is required to adhere to as a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Iranian leaders responded to the censure motion not by improving cooperation with the IAEA, but instead by announcing they would further expand their capacity to enrich uranium at a hardened site in central Iran. Doing so would enable Iran to enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels (90 percent purity) within an even shorter time frame than the few weeks Iranian technicians would require currently.

Iran’s growing stockpile of enriched uranium, coupled with the deterioration of the U.S.-Iran talks, apparently stimulated active planning in Tel Aviv for the decision to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. Detecting Israeli preparations, U.S. officials sought to exercise an abundance of caution by acting on Wednesday to protect U.S. personnel in the Persian Gulf region, should hostilities erupt. The U.S. planning took note of comments earlier that day by Iran’s Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh, who said that Iran would target U.S. military bases in the region stating, “Some officials on the other side threaten conflict if (U.S.-Iran nuclear) negotiations don’t come to fruition. If a conflict is imposed on us … all U.S. bases are within our reach, and we will boldly target them in host countries.” Nasirzadeh made no reference to an Israeli strike that did not involve U.S. participation, but global media interpreted his threat to encompass any strike on Iran, whether by the U.S., Israel, or both. The Iranian threat came on the heels of congressional testimony on Tuesday by Michael “Erik” Kurilla, who as head of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) is the top U.S. military commander in the Middle East. Kurilla stated in his testimony that he provided Trump and U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth with “a wide range of options” for preventing Iran from attaining nuclear arms should talks with Tehran fall through. Those options reportedly were discussed last weekend at a meeting Trump held with his top national security team at Camp David, focused exclusively on the Iran nuclear issue. U.S. officials might consider employing some of the available U.S. options if Iran retaliates for the Israeli attack by striking any U.S. facilities or personnel in the region.

As the regional perception of imminent warfare gathered strength Wednesday, U.S. officials announced an orderly drawdown of U.S. personnel in the region in direct response to the heightened tensions. At the very least, experts assess U.S. forces in the region are likely to assist Israel’s defense against Iranian retaliation, which will in all likelihood take the form of missile and drone attacks on Israeli installations. The U.S. State and Defense Departments announced they were evacuating “non-essential” staff from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and removing the family members of military personnel from several bases in the Gulf where U.S. forces are deployed. The facilities included those in Bahrain, where the U.S. regional naval headquarters is based, and the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait, where U.S. air and ground forces operate. Coinciding with the U.S. departure announcement, a British maritime trade agency that monitors Middle East shipping warned in a public advisory that it had “been made aware of increased tensions within the region which could lead to an escalation of military activity having a direct impact on mariners.” The advisory urged commercial vessels transiting the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and the Strait of Hormuz to use heightened caution. Hours after the departure announcements, President Trump fed speculation about potentially imminent hostilities by telling reporters at an event at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday that U.S. personnel in the Middle East were being moved out because: "It could be a dangerous place, we'll see what happens." When asked what could bring tensions down, Trump stressed: "Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon, we won't allow it." However, Trump gave no indication Israel would soon strike Iranian nuclear sites.

Still, some experts had interpreted the U.S. drawdown announcements and the exchanges of warnings and threats as perhaps an effort by the U.S. and Israel to place pressure on Iran to reverse or modify its planned rejection of Witkoff’s nuclear settlement proposal. Moreover, some of the hallmarks of likely warfare in the Gulf seemed absent. The U.S. did not announce any deployments of additional combat aircraft, units, and air defense batteries to the region. Nor were there signs inside Iran, based on what was being reported openly, of any Iranian movement of air defense or other assets to resist an attack.

On Thursday, prior to the Israeli attack, tensions seemed to ease and the prospects of a collapse of U.S.-Iran nuclear talks receded. The sixth round of U.S-Iran nuclear talks was scheduled for Sunday to take place in Muscat, Oman, – although conflicting reports also stated that it would occur Thursday, or even Friday in Oslo. While U.S. officials have indicated they are willing to pursue nuclear diplomacy despite the Israeli strikes, the Israeli strike is almost certain to cause cancellation of the planned talks in Muscat, leaving many open-ended questions surrounding the U.S-Israel-Iran dynamic.