Last night, U.S. President Donald Trump announced the United States would launch a military strike on three Iranian nuclear facilities. This dramatic and dangerous escalation of tensions in the Middle East has rightly alarmed and outraged those concerned with the potential for more, continued conflict. This was the U.S.’s first direct military action against Iran, excluding Israel’s preemptive strike, since June 13. Whether unified by the U.S. military’s most recent operation, which struck the Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan sites killing high-profile Iranian military leaders and nuclear scientists.
The events unfolded rapidly, beginning with Trump’s announcement on Truth Social at 7:50 p.m. Eastern Time, where he touted the attack as “very successful” and declared, “NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!” His remarks to the nation later that month, wherein he announced the expansion of U.S.
“It’s not politically correct to use the term, ‘Regime Change,’ but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!” – U.S. President Donald Trump
The military strikes have deepened what was already an incredibly tense and volatile situation. In retaliation, Iran’s parliament voted to shut down the Strategic Strait of Hormuz, an essential choke point for much of the world’s oil trade. As dangerous as this decision is to the stability of international energy supplies, the Strait is so far still open. And as we’ve written before, experts are concerned that Iran will seek to close key oil chokepoints. If that comes to pass, then oil prices could soar beyond $100 a barrel, since Western powers would probably need to intervene.
One of their qualifying U.S. secretary of state Marco Rubio has been quite vocally critical of Iran’s actions. He is asking China to intervene and prevent Tehran from executing its threat against the Strait. China, by far Iran’s biggest oil customer, has criticized the U.S. military attacks. Chinese U.N. Ambassador Fu Cong strongly denounced the attacks on the sites under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). He emphasized the need to resolve these concerns through diplomacy.
Iran’s government has responded defiantly. First, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran “reserves all options” for retaliating against the U.S. strikes. Similarly, Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht Ravanchi declared to German media, “no one can tell us what to do,” indicating that Tehran remains committed to its uranium enrichment program despite international pressure.
These unfortunate changes are the result of a tit for tat cycle of hostility. Everything started back in June, when Israel started those preemptive strikes against Iranian interests. Since then, both countries have traded missile tests and military retaliation, only adding to the charged mood in Northeast Asia.
At this critical juncture, as tensions come to a head, analysts are watching closely to assess the situation’s impact. U.S. policymakers seem to be only interested in this latter possibility, looking with renewed favor on variants of regime change in Iran. Trump’s comments suggest a readiness to fundamentally alter the Iranian political playing field should today’s leaders not deliver the change they promised.