“Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000-pound bombs right on target: total obliteration,” is one of the quotes from the White House, addressing the criticism for the attacks carried out in June on Iran, and captures the tone of the hard-line statements, now flooding the presses, concerning Iran policy, emanating from the U.S. government. Much more is at work here than initially appears.
The joint attempt in June 2025, codenamed Operation Midnight Hammer, focused on the most heavily guarded Iranian nuclear installations and took the lives of high-ranking Iranian scientists and military personnel. President Trump is insistent that this attack fully destroyed the Iranian nuclear program, and while anything attempted to rebuild without an agreement is going to be smashed once again, by force, the early intelligence and Iranian efforts have much to say.
As far as a politics-savvy observer or a defense expert with international affairs on the radar, this episode serves as a revealing look into what the likes of Counterproliferation warfare look like today. Below are the most significant ten parameters, which will shape the fallout for the current crisis.
1. Disputed Battle Damage Assessments
Leaked Defense Intelligence Agency assessments in the United States reportedly found that Iran’s nuclear program could have been put “only months” behind its plans, rather than completely eliminating it. Iran’s enrichment plants at Fordow and Natanz may still be operating, and there’s no question that they hadn’t eliminated their uranium yet. The Israel intelligence community’s vetting at Fordow of “total obliteration” agreed with Iran’s government estimates, although Israel’s Atomic Energy Commission believed Iran’s uranium enrichment ambitions had been set back “by many years.” Iran could easily resume uranium enrichment when the time suited them, according to the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Rafael Grossi.
2. Operation Midnight Hammer’s Tactical Execution
The strikes proved U.S. capabilities in action, with the first use of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator on the highly buried infrastructure at Fordow. The coordination between U.S. combatant commanders and Israelis was also a significant aspect, with bombing sorties from U.S. B-2 bombers, Tomahawk missiles, and precision strikes against Natanz, Esfahan, and Iranian missile sites. Other strikes by the Israelis, operating through the umbrella organization “Rising Lion,” aimed at supporting U.S. strikes against Iranian military infrastructure, Iranian air defense systems, and Iranian energy.
3. Iran’s Nuclear Stockpile and Breakout Potential
Iran had over 400 kg of 60% enriched uranium before strikes, which could produce multiple nuclear weapons if further enriched to 90%. Whether this exists anymore remains disputed. In plans in which this exists, breakout times range between 1-3 months, but with damaged and buried stockpiles, this may take between 6-12 months. Israel analysts have predicted that Iran will move out of damaged facilities and establish new ones, but U.S. intelligence believes they could mend facilities to resume production.
4. Strategic Aims and Diplomatic Fallout
This attack has been deemed preventive by Trump himself in order to avoid a breakout. This attack has already been considered the final nail in the coffin regarding the withdrawal from the negotiation table to pass the temporary suspension of Iran’s compliance with the IAEA. The government in Iran is already evaluating a new policy towards the Nuclear Non-Prolification Treaty in order to prove the incompetence of this international document towards the protection of the rights of Iran.
5. Decapitation of Military Leadership
There have been many top government leaders who have died as a result of Israeli attacks, and some are members of the IRGC Command Network, which is a strong idealogue with direct linkage with the Iranian leader, Ali Khamenei. The death of Major General Gholam Ali Rashid, and his subsequent replacement in command with Ali Shadmani, has impacts on shared command powers, including the Khatam ol-Anbia Central Headquarters.
6. Internal Security Crackdown
Iranian Security Forces have, since the last June 12th, arrested at least 700 individuals for political or spy-related purposes, including the so-called Mossad agents. Repression is now targeted at the Kurdish and minority-populated areas. IRGC soldiers have been deployed on the borders, as well as at the entrances to schools. This is in light of the Israeli infiltration into the domestic unrest.
7. Regional Military Dynamics
The action performed by the Israeli government also targeted the Iranian country’s ballistics missiles, from those in the underground brigades in the region of Kermanshah to the infrastructures involving the South Pars Gas Fields. A reduced ability for the protection of enrichment facilities and energy resources will limit Iran in case the country will continue with the production of 3,000 missiles per year, an issue Netanyahu will raise in his meeting with Trump.
8. Proxy and Partner Responses
The Iranian-led networks carried low-level activity. Hezbollah was quiet, and activities from Houthis in Yemen were continued attacks against Israeli territory using drones and missiles but only to formerly established levels. The Gulf states rejected the missile attack but conducted a vociferous criticism against Iranian response mechanisms. Russia and China showed their commitment in words; thus, their shallowness in the anti-West alliance was evident.
9. Global Strategic Ripples
The strikes reflect the potency of the nonproliferation regime. A case is made that the possible use of force against protected sites might impede the full integrity of the NPT, leading more nations to opt for nuclear deterrence. The Indo-Pac context: The redirection of force by the USA to the Middle East has significance for the country’s Taiwan crisis preparations, while the Chinese government studies the Israeli precision strike strategy for use in Taiwan Strait conflicts.
10. Energy Security and Economic Impact
Threats of closing the Strait of Hormuz, posed by Iran, proved to be unfounded, and the cost of Brent crude reduced due to the ceasefire. Attacks by Israelis on Iranian gas installations have raised Iran’s energy crises, implying possible blackouts and turmoil. The chief oil buyer, Chinese officials, thought the threat of closing the Strait of Hormuz unreasonable, further supporting the Chinese attitude of viewing the area as having buffers in the energy sphere, even amidst geopolitical uncertainties.
The strike of June 2025 targeting Iran’s nuclear program is as equally geopolitical as it is a military strike. Even if one informs one-self about the forceful threats of President Trump, whose words are full of decisive and successful outcomes, the challenged intelligence assessment, the dynamic strategy of Iran, and the consequences of its global strategy communicate a different message to defense strategists and policymakers. Lessons of this strike are to be learned within the context of force utilization and its applications in a ‘lasting’ nonproliferation strategy.
