Israel vs Iran: D-Day in the Middle East

D-Day has arrived for Israel and Iran. After years of covert warfare, cyberattacks, and clandestine operations, Israel has taken the initiative. In the early hours of Friday, June 13, it launched a direct assault on the heart of Iran’s nuclear program. The main target was the Natanz facility—the country’s most crucial uranium enrichment site—which, according to intelligence reports, was rendered inoperative. The Israeli offensive also severely damaged Tehran’s air defense systems. “The way to Tehran has been paved” declared IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir and Air Force Commander Maj. Gen. Tomer Bar.

How did we get here?
It would be mistaken to think that this war began with Israel’s Friday strike. The true turning point was October 7, 2023, when over 1,200 Israelis were murdered and around 250 abducted in the deadliest attack in the country’s history. Behind Hamas stands Iran. The Palestinian group could not have orchestrated such a complex operation without years of training, weapons, and hundreds of millions of dollars in Iranian funding.

But Iran’s strategy extends far beyond Gaza. Since that fateful day, the Shiite regime has orchestrated a multi-front war against Israel, with attacks from Lebanon (via Hezbollah), Syria, Iraq, Yemen (by the Houthis), the West Bank, and Gaza. A ring of fire designed to wear down and ultimately destroy the Jewish state.

Tensions escalated further when Iran directly attacked Israeli territory twice—in April and October 2024. The return of Donald Trump to the White House briefly opened a 60-day diplomatic window, but serious negotiations never materialized.

To understand Israel’s massive strike on June 13, one must consider what happened just a day earlier. On June 12, the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), comprising 35 countries, issued a stark warning: Iran had violated its non-proliferation commitments. This was not an Israeli or American accusation—it came from the international community, accusing Iran of pursuing a nuclear program with military objectives.

Post–October 7: Israel is not the same country
This was not Iran’s first violation, but the context is now different. Israel, after October 7, sees existential threats with renewed urgency. Israeli defense officials have made clear: they will not allow a nation that openly calls for Israel’s destruction—and has a public countdown toward that goal—to obtain nuclear weapons.

Iranian Protesters unveil a digital countdown showing 8411 days until Israel is destroyed (AP Photo/Ebrahim Noroozi)

The June 13 strike reflects a radical shift in Israel’s security doctrine. Deterrence and containment have been replaced by a clear principle: those who threaten the Jewish state’s existence will be eliminated.

This doctrine has already been applied. Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh (the latter assassinated in the heart of Tehran), as well as Hezbollah’s Hassan Nasrallah, have all been targeted and eliminated. And now, key figures in Iran’s military and nuclear establishment have met the same fate:

• Mohammad Bagheri, Chief of Staff of Iran’s Armed Forces and the second-highest-ranking commander after Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
• Amir Ali Hajizadeh, head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Aerospace Force.
• Hossein Salami, commander-in-chief of the IRGC.
• Gholamali Rashid, deputy commander of the Iranian Armed Forces.
• Fereydoun Abbasi, former director of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran.
• Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, president of Tehran’s Islamic Azad University and a theoretical physicist.

They were joined by several top nuclear scientists—key players in Iran’s atomic ambitions. Israel cannot control the intentions of its enemies, but it can disrupt their capabilities. And after October 7, threats are no longer dismissed.

An existential war—for both sides
Israeli concerns intensified with reports that Iran could mount nuclear warheads onto its 3,000+ ballistic missiles. By Sunday, June 15, Iran had launched around 200 missiles, striking at least 22 locations in Israel. The toll: 13 people killed—including three children—and roughly 380 wounded, nine in critical condition.

Yet what makes this conflict especially perilous is that it is existential not only for Israel—but also for the Iranian regime. Not the Iranian state itself, but the theocratic rule of the ayatollahs that has dominated since 1979. In this context, Prime Minister Netanyahu addressed the Iranian people directly, distinguishing between them and their oppressive rulers. A message that, if it resonates, could shake the very foundations of the regime’s grip on power.

Is diplomacy still an option?
In such a charged atmosphere, diplomacy feels like a fragile gamble. Many doubt that the current international system has the capacity to mediate in a crisis that threatens global security.

All eyes are on Washington. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio was quick to label the Israeli attack as “unilateral” and insisted the US was not involved—a move likely aimed at avoiding Iranian retaliation or preserving diplomatic channels with Tehran.

Trump, meanwhile, raised the pressure: “The Iranians must return to the negotiating table before it’s too late.” But for the regime in Tehran, entering talks after such a devastating blow would mean admitting military vulnerability. Unless their power structure is irreparably damaged, this is a humiliation the ayatollahs are unlikely to accept.

For now, the Biden administration continues sending mixed signals: on one hand, keeping the door to diplomacy open; on the other, quietly helping Israel intercept Iranian missiles. Sooner or later, this ambiguity will need to be resolved.

A chance to reshape the region?
The United States faces a historic dilemma. Intervening openly on behalf of Israel and its moderate allies would mean reclaiming its role as a global hegemon and defender of liberal values. It wouldn’t be unprecedented. During World War II, Washington confronted Nazism and Japanese militarism, tilting the balance toward democracy.

We may be witnessing a similar moment. The cost of intervention is high, but the cost of inaction, in a world of rising powers like China and Russia, could be even higher.

History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes. And this time, the next verse may be written in the Middle East.