Iran’s Islamic regime, which has terrorised the region and its own population for decades, is finally facing a reckoning. Its nuclear programme, one of the two tools it has used in its terrorist strategy, may well have been destroyed now. Parts of it were already bombed by Israel. But its most secure sites – Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan – have now been hit by the United States.
The US reportedly dropped six GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bunker-busting bombs on the Fordow nuclear facility, which is buried beneath a mountain. These attacks have, at the very least, set back the Iranian nuclear weapons programme considerably. The fear of opponents of such military action against the programme – that this would simply hasten an Iranian nuclear bomb – does not seem to understand that the programme is now severely degraded and incapable of delivering a weapon at this point.
This attack comes on top of the defanging of Iran’s other strategic instrument, its regional terrorist proxies such as Hezbollah and Hamas. The Houthis are still standing, even if much weakened. Its other supporters in Lebanon have been weakened; Bashar al-Assad, its Syrian dictator ally, is now sitting in Moscow, having managed to flee the country with barely the clothes on his back a few months ago.
Iran risked a fight
Iran has been making threats, seeking to deter others simply through its capacity for reckless behaviour, despite its weakness in other ways. Its economy is not in good shape despite its oil wealth, and its military is not particularly effective because the regime focuses more on covert forces.
But terrorist strategies can only get you so far. Over time, others can figure out ways to work around your threats or prepare themselves so that they can escalate to deter. That is what Israel, in particular, has done. It has effectively neutered both Hezbollah and Hamas, picking off its leaders and cadre in highly effective direct and indirect operations that were breathtaking in their audacity and meticulous in their execution.
Iran has been risking this fight for a long time, repeatedly attacking the US and Israel and their partners. Iran has been an expansionist power in the region, creating instability by building up covert forces from Lebanon in the Mediterranean to Yemen in the Arabian Sea. None of this was necessary.
It was not necessary for Iranian security, except in the broadest definition of national security—which equates it with control over the entire region. The country had little reason to fight with either Israel or the US, neither of which was a threat to Iran or even the regime. Nevertheless, Iran picked this fight, and it is now paying the price.
Also read: To be or not to be? Trump’s next call on Iran-Israel conflict will reshape West Asia
On the losing end
There is no way that Iran can win this fight. Prudence would dictate that Tehran take a deep breath and reassess its choices. It did this to some extent after the US killed the commander of the Quds force, Qasem Soleimani, in 2020. Whether the country will act prudently now that its bluff has been called remains to be seen.
If Iran doesn’t take a step back to reevaluate, there will be further US action, which could lead to a regime change in Tehran. There was already an argument for this—that as long as the current Islamist regime continues in power, it could attempt to reconstitute the nuclear weapons programme. The only way to ensure the programme ends is by changing the rulers who want the weapons. But the US, and Trump in particular, do not appear keen on this as they know the risks associated with such goals. America seems intent on halting military operations, now that it has achieved its ends in large measure.
Tehran’s response is critical because further imprudence will lead to its end. While the demise of this brutal regime is an outcome that is much to be desired, it will also likely come at great cost to innocent Iranians who have already been suffering under its yoke. And of course, others in the region will also bear the repercussions.
Also read: No country can stop Israel-Iran war now. For Netanyahu & Khamenei, it’s a zero-sum game
Consequences beyond Tehran
The US attack on Iran will have consequences beyond Iran and the West Asian region—such as on domestic politics in the US. It could splinter Trump’s MAGA (Make America Great Again) coalition. Even before this attack, there were some clear breaks with anti-Israel and anti-Semitic sections of MAGA criticising various supporters of Israel, or arguments favouring US attacks on Iran. That argument had never directly targeted Trump. The question is whether that will change or whether MAGA will be whatever Trump says it is.
Internationally, this will be at least partially good news for Ukraine. Iran has been supporting Russia by supplying it with drones that kill Ukrainian civilians. While this attack might not directly affect the supply of drones to Russia—because Russia has also built drone factories within its territory now—it will still be satisfying for Kyiv to see Moscow’s allies get their comeuppance.
Trump’s action could also send a message to China. The US president recently said that nobody can predict his behaviour as he doesn’t decide what to do until the last minute. He is correct, since he often doesn’t know what he wants to do, and has no philosophical perspective beyond childish grievances and venality to guide him. But this means that if China was hoping that Trump would stand aside if it invades Taiwan, it will now be much more uncertain.
A key distinction, of course, is that China has real material capability. In other words, it doesn’t depend on threats alone, though threats are part of the strategic equation. If threats don’t work, Beijing can actually undertake military action. Of course, a high-intensity war, with the world’s most powerful military, is a task fraught with uncertainty.
Will Xi Jinping be willing to undertake such a risky strategy? It’s difficult to predict the Chinese president’s actions, especially because he is not very strategic or prudent in his behaviour. But it is fair to say that Trump’s action will give him a pause.
Some American scholars are always eager to condemn the US military’s over-extension and lack of prudence. They are sometimes even right. But such criticisms are rarely raised about other powers, including regional ones. They need to recognise this is a problem that afflicts many types of states and regimes. Iran is a good example. If China invades Taiwan, that would be another example of imprudence and over-expansion being a wider phenomenon.
Rajesh Rajagopalan is a professor of International Politics at Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU), New Delhi. He tweets @RRajagopalanJNU. Views are personal.
(Edited by Zoya Bhatti)