During the early hours of Sunday, the US launched Operation Midnight Hammer, a series of precision strikes on Iran’s key nuclear facilities: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. President Donald Trump declared that Iran’s enrichment infrastructure had been “completely and totally obliterated” and warned “either peace or tragedy” lies ahead. Secretary of State Marco Rubio ruled out “regime change”, expressing the US’s willingness to negotiate, and affirming that it will not take any military action unless Iran escalates.
The strikes came shortly after a diplomatic window had seemingly opened. British Foreign Secretary David Lammy had met Rubio and Middle East Special Envoy Steve Witkoff in Washington, after which Trump’s press secretary announced a two-week window for diplomacy. This followed Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s outreach, suggesting that Iran was open to indirect talks. Trump walked out of the G7 summit to prioritise these developments. However, Vice President J D Vance and Witkoff’s visit to Turkey fell through as Iran decided not to go ahead with talks without Israel halting its attacks. The last straw, reportedly, was the E3-Iran foreign ministerial meeting in Geneva, which failed to shift Tehran’s position on enrichment. The US strikes were launched within 48 hours.
Iran’s initial reaction was somewhat fiery. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the US action as “extremely dangerous, lawless, and criminal behavior,” warning of “everlasting consequences” and declaring that “all options are open”. Iran also accused the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of indirectly enabling the strikes.
Despite fears of radiological fallout, both Iran’s Regulatory Authority and the IAEA confirmed that no off-site radiation spike has been detected so far. Still, Isfahan remains a concern as it is a uranium conversion facility, with gaseous uranium compounds that are both chemically toxic and radiologically active. The IAEA also convened an emergency meeting of the Board of Governors in Vienna on Monday for further assessments.
Iran has retaliated by firing a number of missiles at Tel Aviv, Haifa, and other locations in Israel. The decision of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei on further retaliation is awaited. Will Iran escalate further or respond in a calibrated manner, as it did after the assassination of Qassem Soleimani in 2020? Over 4,00,000 US troops are stationed in the region, and the risk of broader conflict is immense. There is also uncertainty about the domestic political implications inside Iran: Will the public rally around the flag, or will frustration turn inwards? Will Iran activate its regional proxies to strike US bases or will it attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz? And can it do so effectively, given that its own missile capabilities have been reduced because of the strikes by Israel and the US?
A non-binding Iranian parliamentary resolution adopted on Sunday calls for the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, but most analysts view this as rhetoric aimed at placating hardliners. However, two empty supertankers after entering the waterway did a U-turn yesterday, indicating first signs of diversion.
Russia and China have condemned the strikes. Beijing called them a “serious violation of international law” and pushed for a UNSC reaffirmation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Yet, neither power appears willing to get involved and have limited themselves to statements supporting Iran. Foreign Minister Araghchi travelled to Moscow for political and diplomatic support and to explore the role of Russia as a mediator, potentially involving China or multilateral mechanisms.
India has remained cautious and balanced. Operation Sindhu was launched on June 18 to evacuate Indian nationals. Iran made a special gesture of opening its airspace for the evacuation of Indian nationals. Over 1,100 have already been brought home via special charter flights from Mashhad, Yerevan, and Ashgabat. Prime Minister Modi spoke to the Iranian President and emphasised de-escalation, dialogue and diplomacy, reiterated by External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar.
For India, these developments cannot be viewed from a distance. The wider regional and global implications are grave. A broader conflict may ignite multi-front warfare involving the Houthis and Iran-backed militias in Iraq. US troops in the region face increased risk. Oil prices have increased amid disruption fears.The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow channel through which nearly 20 per cent of the world’s oil and significant quantities of gas flow, is a critical lifeline. Its disruption would have immediate consequences for India’s economy and its diaspora in the Gulf. Although India has built strategic reserves and diversified supply lines, a sudden spike in energy prices could accelerate inflation and deepen global market instability.
Beyond energy, India must also recalibrate its strategic posture. We have close ties with Iran (particularly under the Chabahar framework), deep strategic relations with Israel, and increasing defence interoperability with the United States. In this moment of potential rupture, we must continue to avoid taking sides while using our influence to support de-escalation and a return to the negotiating table.
What lies ahead is uncertain. Much depends on whether Ayatollah Khamenei, like in 1988, chooses to “drink the chalice of poison” and accept a deal to avoid existential collapse. At that time, Ayatollah Khamenei ended the war with Iraq, recognising the cost of indefinite conflict. Today, the circumstances are different but the logic of strategic retreat may still apply. Khamenei’s silence — over 24 hours now — has led many to believe Iran may opt for a face-saving de-escalation.
India, which has always emphasised dialogue, multilateralism, and restraint, must be prepared to play a constructive role. It must also prepare economically and diplomatically for the turbulence that may follow. What remains unknown is the fate of Iran’s residual nuclear expertise. Enrichment facilities can be rebuilt, and knowledge cannot be bombed. As the IAEA and others have observed, Iran’s technical capacity — rooted in decades of experience — still matters. Which is why negotiations remain essential.
The writer is former governor of India to IAEA, Vienna
