By Dr. Shahid Hashmat
Tensions between Iran and Israel have been going on for last many decades. On June 13, Israel carried out an large-scale air offensive against on Iran’s nuclear and military facilities. During these attacks, top military commanders and many nuclear scientists were killed. Israeli ‘Operation Rising Lion’ targeted over 100 sites, including nuclear facilities at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan, as well as ballistic missiles storage sites and command and control centres. The battle damage assessment indicates that above-ground nuclear infrastructure have sustained heavy damage. However, the underground facilities appear to have remained intact and unhurt. In response, Iran fired several hundred ballistic missiles and launched drone attacks, causing substantial damage. Both countries have engaged numerous military and civilian targets in last seven days battle. Israel has announced that the air strikes will go on for several weeks till attainment of war objectives. Iran has also vowed to safeguard its territorial integrity and sovereignty and punish Israeli aggression.
The United Nations (UN) and many countries have condemned Israel’s unprovoked and unprecedented aggression against Iran. The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) held its meeting on 13 June 2025. UN Undersecretary-General for Political Affairs urged both sides to show “maximum restraint at this critical moment.” She urged that “a peaceful resolution through negotiations remains the best means to ensure the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear programme”. She asked the council: “We must at all costs avoid a growing conflagration which would have enormous global consequences.” Iran’s UN Envoy told the UNSC that Israeli attacks were “declaration of war and a direct assault on international order.” Spokesperson for U.N. Secretary-General stated that “the Secretary-General condemns any military escalation in the Middle East. He is particularly concerned by Israeli attacks on nuclear installations in Iran while talks between Iran and the U.S. on the status of Iran’s nuclear programme are underway.”
Russia and China has also responded in most significant manner. Russian Foreign Ministry stated: “Unprovoked military strikes against a sovereign U.N. member state, its citizens, peaceful cities, and nuclear energy infrastructure are categorically unacceptable. The international community cannot afford to be indifferent to such atrocities, which destroy peace and damage regional and international security.” Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson said: “China opposes the violation of Iran’s sovereignty, security and territorial integrity, opposes the intensification of contradictions, the expansion of conflicts, and the sudden rise in temperature of the regional situation.”
NATO Secretary-General has called this attack as “a unilateral action by Israel.” Whereas, the head Of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned that any military action that jeopardises the safety and security of nuclear facilities risks grave consequences for the people of Iran, the region, and beyond. The reaction of the United States (U.S.) and its most allies was quite eccentric, contentious and offensive, which reflects their contrived mindset and prejudice about Iran. Britain, France and Germany though, asked for restrains from both sides, yet focused more on ‘Israel’s right of self-defence’, without any respect and regard for the international law and the UN Charter.
Israel claims much higher level of coordination with the U.S. than publicly reported. Israeli Prime Minister, Netanyahu, has projected Israeli attacks on Iran to protecting the U.S. and Israel’s combined interest in Middle East. He has been doing it for last over two decades. He has portrayed that Israel was safeguarding the U.S. interest in the region, claiming the U.S. unflinching support to protect and sustain Israel as a beacon of Western Civilization. While announcing Israel’s ‘Operation Rising Loin’, he encouraged and provoked the U.S. to destroy and punish Iran because it had not accepted their terms of nuclear deal.
Strangely, President Trump has also used the same language, rather in most bizarre, undiplomatic, and uncivilized manner. He has threated Iran either to make with the U.S. or face Israeli attacks with most lethal weapons. President Trump did not hesitate threating Iran that Israel had lot of most dangerous weapons in the world. Indeed, the U.S. is playing multiple games and has trapped Iran through a well-orchestrated gambit. It launched a three prong diplomatic and offensive manoeuvre: grabbing over four trillion US dollars from Arab states, during Trump’s recent visit to Middle East, as an extortion for providing a security umbrella; enticing Iran in negotiations as a ploy; and conniving with Israel to launch surprise attack on Iran with U.S weapons when it was preparing for dialogue with the U.S. Some analysts have called it a classic ensnarement. Having trapped Iran in such vicious manner, Trump warned Iran of ‘Even More Brutal’ attacks without Nuclear Deal.
Muslim countries have strongly condemned Israel’s attack, highlighting extremely serious consequence of the attack and catastrophic expansion of the conflict across the region and beyond. Reaction of Turkey and Pakistan is most significant. Turkish President, Tayyip Erdogan said: “The attacks of Netanyahu and his massacre network, which are setting our entire region and the world on fire, must be prevented.” Pakistan’s response to these attacks has been very forceful and unequivocal. Besides condemning the immoral, unprovoked, and senseless offensive by Israel, Pakistan expressed its solidarity with Iran. Pakistan’s PM urged the international community and the U.N. to take “urgent and credible steps to end Israel’s war in Iran.” Pakistan’s Defense Minister urged Muslim nations to adopt a unified strategy to counter Israel, warning that failure to act collectively would leave them vulnerable. He also expressed full diplomatic support to Iran. Pakistan has demanded that a meeting of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) should be convened immediately. He urged that all Muslim countries must come together to devise a common and unified strategy through which Israel can be confronted collectively. Pakistan’s envoy to the UNSC condemned Israel in extremely strong words and asserted that “Iran has the right to self-defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter.” Pakistan has also expressed its solidarity with Palestine amid Israel’s ‘brazen military aggression,’ which has continued with complete impunity and global neglect. Pakistan is equally concerned and apprehensive about any spill over of the conflict to its territory, especially the Balochistan province which is adjacent to Iran.
The most crucial aspects in these crises is to understand the Israeli and the U.S. objectives of ongoing offensive, the prospects of their attainment, and broader consequences for the region and beyond. The stated objective of ‘Operation Rising Loin’ is to degrade and destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities denying her the capability to produce weapon grade enriched uranium that can be used to make a nuclear bomb. However, there is lot more to it. Indeed, Israel and the U.S. want a ‘regime change’ in Iran by destroying its strategic protentional and by eliminating its military and political leadership. They expect that the current Islamic regime would fall apart or may face a revolt from within due to unbearable hardships and adversities. Other objectives include: economic collapse of Iran, destruction, or, at least, substantial degradation cum neutralization of Iranian armed forces, elimination of senior political and military leadership, and assignation of senior scientists. Netanyahu has openly declared that Israel wants to kill Iran’s supreme leader. Trump has also indicated the same.
Both the countries, supported by their allies, have pursued these policy all along since Iranian Revolution in 1979. Multiple economic sanctions, overt and covert military and intelligence operations, diplomatic isolation, and encouraging Iraq to invade Iran were part of same strategy. Having failed to do so, now they have crafted the bogy of nuclear weapon exactly in same manner as the U.S. and its Western allies had embarked upon maligning Saddam Hussain regime and later Moamar Qaddafi for possessing weapons of mass destruction prior to invading Iraq and Libya. Later on, they confessed that it was an intelligence failure. The same happened in case of Syria as well. In fact, the main issue is entirely different. Professor Jeffery Sachs has explained it as ‘Operation Clean Break,’ i.e. CIA’s and Mossad’s joint plan to destroy seven Muslim countries, including Iran. Other six are already ruined and devasted. The ultimate aims is to establish ‘Greater Israel’ that stretches from Euphrates / Persian Gulf in the east to River Nile in the west and from Arabian Peninsula in south to Mediterranean in the north. This objective is being achieved, step by step, by Israel with active connivance, complaisance, and collusion of the U.S., the UK, France and Germany. Constant diplomatic and economic support, uninterrupted supply of military hardware, latest weapons, ammunitions, cutting edge technologies and most of all complete impunity for waging war in the whole region, committing genocide and ethnic cleaning of Palestinians in Gaza and west Bank are cardinal element of such strategy.
Major questions are: How much damage has been inflicted on Iran?; What will be Iran’s response beyond the current level of engagement and will Iran be able to sustain that?; Is there a likelihood of conflict expansion in Gulf region or the Middle East?; How the Arab States and other Muslim countries are responding beyond official rhetoric?; How would this conflict be resolved; and who could potentially mediate and through what mechanisms? Since the conflict is still evolving and there are numerous variables, there are no conclusive answers to these questions. However, following factors need careful consideration.
A large-scale escalation by Iran appears less likely in the short term due to several constraints. Iran has to rely heavily on missile strikes against Israeli targets, primarily because of its relative technological gap and limited air force capacity. Iran is also aware of the risk of direct U.S. military involvement should it significantly expand the conflict. For this reason, Iran has, so far, has avoided engaging U.S. assets or its forces in the region. Therefore, Iran is pursuing a calibrated strategy of sustained but limited engagement unless it suffers badly. Despite some deficiencies, Iran possesses substantial missile capabilities and asymmetric warfare tools, though considerable decimated. These two elements provide a degree of resilience. Compared to Israel, it has strategic depth and a large population. However, a prolonged conflict would strain its military capability, logistic stamina, economic infrastructure, and domestic political stability. Potential additional sanctions, diplomatic isolation, coupled with the absence of reliable strategic allies, further undermine its capacity to sustain a long-term conflict. The current priority for Iran is damage containment and strategic recalibration rather than prolonged escalation.
At present, a regional spill over appears less likely, though it cannot be ruled out entirely. The most critical variable remains the potential involvement of U.S. forces stationed in the Gulf. So far, the U. S. has refrained from direct military engagement, in order to prevent further regional destabilization. However, any attack on the U.S. assets or its allies could alter this posture and widen the scope of the conflict. Netanyu is very keen to drag the U.S into the conflict because Israel alone cannot cause irreparable damage to Iran. There are many commonalities in the U.S. and Israeli objectives, especial the regime change. Therefore, a possibility of a false flag operation of engaging the U.S. forces through covert activity of a proxy instigated by Israel cannot be rule out. In that case, the U.S will be dragged into the conflict which may spread very fast and could engulf the whole region.
Most Arab and Muslims countries have condemned the Israeli aggression against Iran in a similar manner as they did in case of Gaza. Such censures and denunciations are mostly political rhetoric for diplomatic outcry or domestic political consumption. The harsh reality is that most of the contemporary Muslim world, especially Arabs remain highly divided and internally weak. While some countries maintain pragmatic relations with both parties, there is growing concern over the possibility of a wider regional war affecting their own interests. Of course, there is fear of spread of radiation if Iran’s nuclear facilities are damaged. The proximity of sensitive sites like Iran’s Bushehr nuclear plant to Gulf territories has heightened anxieties. Consequently, there is strong regional interest in de-escalation and the prevention of a protracted or nuclear-triggered conflict
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkiye, through their joint efforts, would bee able to play an affective role in diffusing the tension in the region and may succeed to stop further escalation of the conflict. In International Politics and Global Affairs ‘National Interest’ remains paramount in making national policies and decisions. Though, the current leadership of these countries would try to protect their national interests under difficult prevailing geopolitical compulsions and constrains and these countries may not have complete unanimity of their national interest, yet containment of the conflict and its peaceful resolution is in their common interest.
Along with other countries Pakistan has asked international community that Iran’s territorial integrity and political sovereignty must be respected. Pakistan’s concerns about catastrophic consequences the conflict expanding in the region or beyond are more serious as it shares a long land border and a coast between Iranian Sistan-Balochistan and Pakistan’s Balochistan provinces. Any large scale destabilization in Iran and displacement of Iranian people would put enormous pressures on Pakistan, which is still grappling with Afghan refugees problem for last over forty years. Moreover, Pakistan’s Balochistan province is political disturbed and volatile due to obvious
Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities has another more pronounced implication for Pakistan, due to its close proximity. Israel has hit nuclear facilities at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. The current damage seems to be on surface only but Israel plans and is trying to cause more serious damage to these facilities. In case of any serious damage, the radiation leakage will affect much wider area. There, there is a genuine anguish, disgust, frustration, and consternation in Pakistan. Moreover, Pakistanis have natural affinity with Iranian people which is based on centuries old historical, cultural and religious ties. It must be noted that IAEA’s head has also warned against extremely catastrophic consequences of Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities, which were IEAE’s safeguards and regular inspections.
Iranian Government has informed the Parliament that it is evaluating to quite NPT as IAEA is manipulating its inspection reports and real facts to provide false casus belli to Israel, the U.S. and its allies, especially the U.K., France and Germany, to coerce, harassed and blackmail Iran in an unjustifiable manner. In reality, Iran has remained under constant economic and military sanctions. Iran’s legitimate right to develop its nuclear facilities and enrich nuclear fuel for peaceful civilian use has been denied. Israel had attacked these facilities earlier as well with the intent of destroying them. Moreover, many Iran nuclear scientists have been assassinated through covert and overt operations. After the recent attacks, Iran has no incentive to continue participating in NPT.
With such aggressive, blatant, deliberate, and audacious violation of all international laws, norms and covenants, the future of many international protocols, including NPT becomes highly questionable. The member states, who are signatories of the Treaty, neither have any incentive nor any safeguard and protection as assured under the Teary. The NPT, in any case is too discriminatory, biased, and inequitable. Not only Iran would seriously consider to leave the NPT but many other countries may also consider the same. More serious implication is that Iran would try to attain enrichment of uranium to the level of nuclear weapon capability as fast as possible because that would be considered as the only way to protect its territorial integrity and sovereignty.
President Trump’s recent demand for Iran’s unconditional surrender and total capitulation are extremely contemptuous that poses unimaginable threat to international peace and security. With the U.N being totally made irrelevant, the international community, if at all it exists, must take a serious note of the catastrophic consequences of madness displayed by Israel and the U.S.
