IN THE early morning of Friday June 13, Israel carried out a large-scale air operation on Iran, under the codename Rising Lion. According to the Israeli army, it was a “precise, preventive attack” aimed at Iranian nuclear facilities.

However, the missiles also struck residential neighbourhoods in Tehran, Isfahan and other provinces. According to Iranian media, at least 50 people were killed, including women, children and prominent scientists.

Among the dead were Hossein Salami, the commander of the Revolutionary Guard, Mohammad Bagheri, the chief of staff of the Iranian army, and several Iranian nuclear scientists.

It’s not the first time Israel has militarily attacked Iran. In the past, military and nuclear facilities have been bombed, and top military figures and nuclear scientists have been assassinated. But this is the largest direct attack by the zionist state against Iran.

Escalation in a powder keg

Iran responded by launching hundreds of Shahed drones toward Israel. Iranian leader Khamenei called it a “dirty crime” and promised a “hard and decisive” retaliation.

The attack came notably just two days before a new round of negotiations between Iran and the US over the nuclear agreement. According to several sources, Israel aims to torpedo those talks and militarily weaken Iran before a diplomatic solution can be reached.

The alleged threat of Iranian nuclear weapons is hardly credible. Israel knows that Iran doesn’t have the capacity for that. With this war, it may seek to provoke a larger conflict throughout the Middle East in order to push the US and Nato into military involvement “to protect Israel.”

The attack also seems driven by internal pressure. More than 1,300 retired high-ranking military officers called last month for an end to the “political war in Gaza,” warning that it could lead Israeli soldiers to commit war crimes.

A similar petition by over 2,500 artists, writers, and peace activists condemned the “war of deception,” stating that a war in which over 15,600 children are killed is not moral.

Against this backdrop, the left-wing group Standing Together organised a three-day anti-war march last week from Tel Aviv to the Gaza border, a protest that would have been unthinkable in the early stages of the war.

The attack on Iran, in any case, offers PM Benjamin Netanyahu a way to shift the debate. By redirecting attention to an external enemy, he tries to silence growing criticism of his leadership and to gain support under the banner of “national security.”

Trump’s calculated gamble

US President Donald Trump publicly stated that he was not involved in the attack but did express his understanding and support for Israel. His envoy was still on the way to Oman to mediate between Iran and the US. However, Trump did not draw any “red line” for Netanyahu, allowing Israel to carry out the attack without real resistance from Washington.

Trump’s support for Israel is striking because he is also committed to better economic relations with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. Those countries have, in recent years, sought rapprochement with Iran. The Israeli attack — and the uncompromising stance on Gaza and the refusal to pursue a two-state solution — puts those diplomatic opening efforts under pressure.

The bombings on Iran sabotage the planned negotiations with Iran. At this moment, Trump’s priority is the weakening of Iran, even if that temporarily harms relations with the Gulf states.

Military balance of power

The military balance between the two countries is not insignificant. According to data from the renowned International Institute for Strategic Studies, Iran has over 600,000 active soldiers, a significantly larger number than Israel's approximately 170,000 active personnel.

Iran possesses thousands of tanks, artillery units and an air force of more than 300 combat aircraft. Israel, in turn, has a technologically advanced military, including 345 modern fighter jets and the famous Iron Dome air defence system, which is capable of intercepting incoming missiles.

Still, a massive Iranian attack — especially with precise information on vulnerable Israeli targets — could put Israel’s defence shield under heavy pressure.

Both countries possess ballistic missiles with considerable range. Israel has, among others, the Jericho-3, with a range of possibly over 6,000 kilometres. Iran possesses the Sejjil and Khorramshahr missiles, which can reach up to 2,000 kilometres.

According to international estimates, Israel currently has approximately 90 nuclear warheads. Iran, on the other hand, does not possess nuclear weapons, although it has an advanced nuclear programme. Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei has issued a religious decree banning the production of nuclear weapons, but recently Iran warned that it might revise its nuclear doctrine if the survival of the country is threatened.

Iran claims to have obtained sensitive and detailed information about secret Israeli nuclear installations. According to the Iranian Supreme National Security Council, this intelligence enables them, in case of an Israeli attack, to carry out a “proportionate” retaliatory strike by immediately targeting hidden Israeli nuclear sites.

That message appears intended both as deterrence and as preparation for a possible escalation into a direct war between an existing nuclear power and one in development.

Possible escalation

Iran has several options to respond to the Israeli bombings, without necessarily striking directly. Through allies such as Hezbollah, the Houthis or Shi’ite militias in Iraq and Syria, it can carry out attacks on US military bases, Israeli targets or strategic positions in the region. Sabotage or cyberattacks on Western infrastructure are also possible.

A particularly worrisome scenario is an attack on oil installations in the region. That would drive up oil prices and harm the global economy. Iran has previously threatened to block the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial maritime oil passage, in the event of major aggression.

These current tensions thus increase the risk of a broader regional escalation with global economic consequences.

A flight forward

From Australia to China, harsh criticism was voiced against the Israeli attack. The UN secretary-general warned of a “dangerous escalation” and called for maximum restraint.

The economic consequences could also be significant. Oil prices surged by more than 7 per cent following the attack. Further escalation — especially if Iran were to strike oil infrastructure in the region — could disrupt oil markets. A regional conflict could thus severely damage the global economy, leading to price hikes and recession.

With the bombings, Netanyahu chooses the flight forward. It is a reckless attempt to block a diplomatic path, suppress internal opposition and maintain geopolitical dominance in a region where power relations are shifting.

The international community must do more than just issue warnings. It is high time for concrete diplomatic and economic sanctions against Israel. With a state that tramples international law, commits genocide, bombs neighbouring countries, and deliberately risks a regional war, normal relations are impossible.

Only firm pressure — through arms embargoes, trade restrictions and diplomatic isolation — can bring this aggressive regime to order.