Iran and Israel spiral into open war

Asem Mustafa Awan

Islamabad: On June 13, 2025, decades of shadow conflict erupted into open war as Israel launched an unprecedented aerial campaign across Iran. Under the operation code-named “Rising Lion,” around 200 Israeli fighter jets struck over a hundred sites, targeting nuclear facilities, ballistic missile bases, and senior military leadership.

Among the casualties were high-ranking generals and two nuclear scientists, marking a dramatic escalation.

The Israeli government framed the operation as a last-resort action to halt what it described as Iran’s accelerating path toward nuclear weapons. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the nation shortly after the strikes, stating that Israel had “no choice” as Iran was “on the cusp of nuclear breakout.” Israeli intelligence suggested Tehran had sharply increased enrichment activity, narrowing the window to act.

In response, Iran launched waves of drones toward Israeli cities. Most were intercepted, but the attack signaled a shift from proxy war to direct confrontation. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei labeled Israel’s assault a “declaration of war” and promised retaliation that would be “painful and permanent.” Iran’s defense ministry called on allied militias across the region to prepare for coordinated action.

Former U.S. President Donald Trump, speaking in Florida, confirmed he had prior knowledge of the Israeli plans but urged Iran to stand down. He called on Tehran to “let go” of its nuclear ambitions and return to diplomacy. Trump had previously advocated a renewed agreement with Iran, though those talks had faltered amid skepticism in Tehran. Iranian officials dismissed his remarks as political noise.

The Biden administration issued a carefully worded response, expressing concern while reaffirming Israel’s right to defend itself. It emphasized that the US had played no role in the attack and took steps to safeguard American personnel in the region. Sanctions on Iran’s drone and cyber warfare units were reimposed, while U.S. assets were placed on alert.

Inside Iran, the strikes have deepened nationalist sentiment. Crowds gathered outside military sites and government buildings, calling for retribution. State media broadcast images of destroyed facilities and funerals of the slain generals, reinforcing the perception of an unprovoked attack. Iranian officials stated they did not seek full-scale war but would retaliate forcefully if provoked again.

Governments across the world voiced alarm, calling for restraint. From Berlin to Beijing, diplomats urged both sides to avoid further escalation. The UN Secretary-General warned that the region stood on the brink of catastrophe, appealing to both nations to back away from the edge.

Regional powers, particularly in the Gulf, began preparing for economic and security fallout, anticipating disruptions to energy routes and regional stability.

The international response has been complicated. While many support de-escalation, few agree on how to achieve it. The U.S. has avoided direct involvement but continues supporting Israel diplomatically.

Israel, meanwhile, has closed its airspace and placed defense systems on high alert, anticipating additional drones or missile fire. Embassies in the region are evacuating staff amid fears of retaliation or cyberattack.

This confrontation follows more than a year of mounting tensions. In April 2024, Iran launched more than 300 drones and missiles at Israel in retaliation for the assassination of senior generals in Syria.

That round of conflict, while intense, was brief. Today’s direct strikes on strategic infrastructure and leadership figures represent a fundamental shift—erasing the fine line between open and covert warfare.

Diplomacy had seen brief momentum earlier this year. Backchannel negotiations through Oman had explored a phased rollback of uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief. But those efforts collapsed under domestic pressure from hardliners on both sides. The International Atomic Energy Agency had also reported Iran’s lack of cooperation in recent months, deepening international skepticism and complicating any deal.

Now, with nuclear facilities damaged and senior officials killed, the space for diplomacy has shrunk even further. Iran’s regional proxies in Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen remain active and could launch retaliatory strikes. Israel’s intelligence operations—effective in recent years—may find it harder to function as Iran tightens security and hardens its borders. Meanwhile, global markets are reacting with unease. Oil prices have spiked, and investors are bracing for broader instability.

At this point, the world faces a difficult set of questions. Can either side afford to escalate further? Is there any neutral ground left for mediation? Some suggest urgent diplomacy from neutral countries or the UN might create a pathway back to talks. Others fear that trust has eroded beyond repair and that only exhaustion will bring both sides back from the brink.

What makes this conflict particularly dangerous is how far both parties have gone. Intelligence officers are dead. Critical sites have been bombed. Civilians are bracing for the unknown. The long game of deterrence, sabotage, and strategic ambiguity has given way to overt, punishing blows in full view of the world.

In this moment, even impartial observers must confront a sobering truth. The crisis is no longer looming—it has arrived. The shadow war is over.

In its place is a dangerous, unfolding conflict that could redraw alliances, destabilize economies, and alter the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. Unless diplomacy is urgently revived, the coming weeks may not just define relations between Israel and Iran—but the trajectory of the region itself.

The article is the writer’s opinion, it may or may not adhere to the organization’s editorial policy.

Asem Mustafa Awan has extensive reporting experience with leading national and international media organizations. He has also contributed to reference books such as the Alpine Journal and the American Alpine Journal, among other international publications.

Post Views: 37