KATHMANDU: On June 13, 2025, Israel launched a series of unprecedented airstrikes on Iran, targeting nuclear facilities and military sites across cities including Tehran, Natanz, and Tabriz. The attacks reportedly killed top Iranian military leaders and nuclear scientists, sparking fears of a wider regional conflict.

Iran vowed harsh retaliation, while Israel described the strikes as essential to preventing Iranian nuclear advancement. The escalation comes amid stalled U.S.-Iran nuclear talks and mounting regional tensions. Global leaders, including the UN and the U.S., have urged restraint. This marks a dramatic escalation in the long-standing shadow war between the two arch-rivals.

This explainer will provide a clear and comprehensive understanding of the recent Israeli airstrikes on Iran, detailing what was targeted, the key figures involved, and the immediate reactions from both countries. It will also explore the potential consequences for regional stability, the risks of escalation into broader conflict, and the historical context of Israel-Iran tensions.

What is the historical context behind Israel-Iran tensions?

The hostility between Israel and Iran dates back to the 1979 Iranian Revolution, when the Shah—an ally of Israel—was overthrown and replaced by the Islamic Republic under Ayatollah Khomeini.

Since then, Iran has rejected Israel’s legitimacy, referring to it as a “Zionist regime” and pledging its eventual demise. In turn, Israel sees Iran as its most dangerous strategic threat.

The rivalry intensified in the 1990s and 2000s, as Iran began pursuing uranium enrichment and building a nuclear infrastructure. Israel believes Iran’s nuclear program is aimed at building a bomb, despite Iranian denials. Over the past two decades, Israel has carried out covert assassinations of Iranian scientists, cyberattacks (such as Stuxnet), and bombings in Syria targeting Iranian proxies.

Iran, meanwhile, has armed and supported anti-Israel groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad, using these proxies to attack Israel indirectly. The two nations have never fought a direct war, but their shadow conflict has spanned across Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and cyberspace.

The current strikes mark a possible transition from covert confrontation to open war, raising the stakes for both countries and challenging existing security paradigms in the Middle East.

What has Israel attacked in Iran?

Israel has launched a major military operation targeting multiple Iranian cities and strategic facilities, including nuclear and military sites. The confirmed locations include Tehran, Natanz, Tabriz, Isfahan, Arak, and Kermanshah. The most critical target was the Natanz uranium enrichment site, where Israel claims to have damaged underground facilities, including centrifuge halls and power infrastructure. In Tabriz, explosions were reported near a nuclear research center and two military bases. Residential areas were also affected, especially in Tehran, leading to civilian casualties and property damage.

The Israeli government stated that these attacks aimed to weaken Iran’s nuclear weapons development capacity, suggesting this was a preemptive move to hinder Iran’s alleged weapons program.

The strikes mark a significant escalation in hostilities between the two countries and have raised fears of a broader regional conflict.

What justification did Israel give for the attack?

Israel framed its actions as self-defense, arguing that it could no longer wait for diplomacy to curtail Iran’s nuclear ambitions. In a video message, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the strikes were meant to degrade Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Israeli military chief Eyal Zamir went further, describing the moment as a “point of no return” and a battle for Israel’s very existence.

Israel’s official stance is that Iran poses a clear and present danger through its continued uranium enrichment and ballistic missile production. The decision to strike was portrayed as both a strategic necessity and a moral imperative to protect Israeli citizens.

However, critics argue that the strikes may have been politically motivated, designed to shift attention from domestic crises or to influence ongoing nuclear negotiations between Iran and the United States. Regardless of motives, Israel’s preemptive use of force in another sovereign nation has drawn international scrutiny and concern.

How did tensions escalate to this point between Israel and Iran?

The path to the current Israel-Iran escalation has been shaped by years of rising hostilities, stalled diplomacy, and deep-rooted mistrust. Iran’s steady progress in uranium enrichment—despite repeated international warnings—has alarmed Israel, which views a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat. While Tehran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, Israeli intelligence and Western allies have long believed Iran is edging closer to weaponization.

Efforts to revive the Iran nuclear deal, once a cornerstone of regional stability, have faltered. Negotiations between Iran and the United States, restarted in April 2025, recently stalled.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has grown increasingly vocal, calling for military solutions over diplomacy.

Tensions boiled over following intelligence that Iran could produce a nuclear bomb “within days.”

Israel’s decision to launch Operation Rising Lion followed years of low-level conflict—including cyberattacks, covert assassinations, and limited airstrikes—but marks a dramatic shift toward open warfare. The killing of top Iranian officials and direct strikes on nuclear sites crossed a dangerous threshold, prompting Iranian retaliation with drone and missile attacks. Both nations now appear entrenched in a volatile cycle of escalation, with diplomacy sidelined and the region bracing for further instability.

Is Iran’s nuclear programme purely civilian in nature?

Iran maintains that its nuclear programme is entirely for peaceful, civilian purposes, such as generating electricity and conducting medical research. As a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), it argues that it has the right to develop nuclear technology within the treaty’s guidelines. Iran has consistently denied pursuing nuclear weapons and has called allegations of militarization politically motivated.

However, concerns persist among several countries and international institutions. This week, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) formally stated that Iran is not meeting its obligations under the NPT, citing “many failures” to clarify the presence of undeclared nuclear material and the growing size of its enriched uranium stockpile. The IAEA recently reported that Iran has enriched uranium to 60% purity, which is close to weapons-grade and far above the level needed for civilian energy use.

This development has fueled suspicion among Western governments and analysts, who argue that the programme may have dual-use potential—meaning it could be redirected toward weapons development if a political decision is made. Still, no definitive public evidence confirms that Iran has decided to pursue a nuclear weapon.

How has Iran retaliated against Israel so far?

Iran has begun its retaliation by launching hundreds of armed drones and cruise missiles toward Israeli territory, marking one of the most direct and large-scale attacks in the history of the Israel-Iran conflict.

The unprecedented drone barrage came within 24 hours of Israel’s airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets that killed top officials, including IRGC commander Hossein Salami and nuclear scientist Fereydoon Abbasi.

The Iranian Defense Ministry confirmed that the drones were launched from multiple locations inside Iran, and coordinated attacks were also carried out through Iran-backed proxies in Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. Israeli defense systems, including the Iron Dome and Arrow missile interceptors, were activated across the country, reportedly intercepting the majority of incoming projectiles. However, some drones managed to strike infrastructure targets, causing localized damage and casualties.

This large-scale retaliation demonstrates Iran’s willingness to engage in direct confrontation, moving beyond proxy warfare. It also serves to satisfy intense domestic pressure for vengeance, particularly after the killing of senior officials. While Tehran’s message is one of strength, the risk now is that Israel may escalate further, possibly targeting Iran again—pushing both nations closer to regional war.

Who were the key Iranian figures killed in the attack?

The Israeli airstrikes reportedly resulted in the deaths of several high-ranking Iranian officials and scientists. Among them was Hossein Salami, commander-in-chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), and Mohammad Bagheri, the chief of staff of Iran’s armed forces. Ali Shamkhani, a top advisor to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, was reported to be critically injured.

Additionally, two leading nuclear scientists — Fereydoon Abbasi, former chief of Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, and Mohammad Tehranchi, head of the Islamic Azad University — were assassinated in what appears to have been coordinated targeted killings.

Another key casualty was Major-General Gholamali Rashid, commander of the Khatam al-Anbiya Headquarters.

These killings represent not just military losses for Iran but also a severe blow to its nuclear and strategic planning capabilities. By targeting senior officials and scientists, Israel seems to have aimed at dismantling Iran’s strategic brain trust, thereby increasing the psychological and operational toll on Tehran’s leadership.

How has the United States responded to the Israeli attack?

The United States has distanced itself from the Israeli strikes. President Donald Trump, in an interview with Fox News, denied U.S. involvement, reiterating Washington’s position that “Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb.” He stressed that diplomacy remains the preferred path but affirmed that the U.S. would help defend Israel if Iran retaliated.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that the U.S. was not operationally involved and emphasized that American troops in the region must not be targeted. Meanwhile, Democratic Senator Chris Murphy criticized the Israeli move as an attempt to derail diplomatic efforts.

The Trump administration has also convened emergency security meetings to assess the implications of the strike. The overriding U.S. concern remains the safety of its personnel and preventing a wider regional war that could pull in multiple stakeholders, including Hezbollah, Gulf countries, and global powers.

How has China responded to the Israeli strikes on Iran?

China has expressed deep concern over Israel’s recent strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites, calling for restraint and dialogue.

In an official statement on Friday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said Beijing opposes any actions that infringe upon Iran’s sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity, and warned against further escalation that could destabilize the region.

Lin emphasized that the “sudden rise in regional tensions is not in the interest of any party,” urging all sides to prioritize de-escalation and diplomatic solutions.

China has positioned itself as a potential mediator in Middle East conflicts, and Lin stated that Beijing is ready to “play a constructive role” in defusing the situation. The response aligns with China’s broader geopolitical interests in the region, where it maintains close economic and diplomatic ties with Tehran, particularly through energy cooperation and infrastructure investments under the Belt and Road Initiative. Iran is a key oil supplier for China, and both countries share a strategic interest in counterbalancing U.S. influence.

Chinese embassies in both Israel and Iran also issued safety advisories, urging citizens to remain vigilant amid the “complex and severe” security environment, and warning of potential missile or drone attacks.

What has been the global reaction to the Israeli strikes?

The global response to Israel’s strikes has been one of alarm and calls for restraint. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres condemned the escalation, urging both sides to avoid plunging the Middle East into deeper conflict. He was particularly concerned about attacks on nuclear infrastructure, which pose global safety risks.

The Sultanate of Oman, a mediator in Iran–U.S. nuclear talks, called Israel’s action “dangerous and reckless,” branding it a violation of the UN Charter and a threat to regional peace and security.

Oman held Israel responsible for any fallout and urged the international community to intervene.

European leaders have also expressed concern, with some calling for an emergency session of the UN Security Council. Human rights organizations are calling for investigations into possible war crimes, especially if civilian infrastructure was deliberately targeted.

Israel’s actions have not only reignited Middle Eastern tensions but have also polarized international opinion, risking long-term diplomatic fallout.

Why is attacking nuclear facilities considered extremely dangerous?

Striking nuclear facilities is fraught with catastrophic risks. These sites often contain radioactive material, and any breach — accidental or intentional — could lead to widespread contamination, long-term environmental damage, and civilian casualties.

The Natanz enrichment facility, reportedly hit by Israel, houses sensitive uranium-processing machinery, including centrifuge halls and electrical systems. If structural containment is breached, the risk of radiation leakage becomes real. That’s why Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), confirmed they are closely monitoring radiation levels and are in contact with Iranian authorities.

Moreover, under international law, attacking civilian nuclear infrastructure could be seen as a war crime. Such actions set dangerous precedents and could undermine the integrity of the nuclear non-proliferation regime. Attacks on these facilities can also trigger public panic, displacement, and international condemnation, even among allies.

Could this confrontation lead to a regional war in the Middle East?

The risk of a wider Middle East war has significantly increased. Israel’s attacks on multiple Iranian cities, including its nuclear infrastructure and military leadership, represent an unprecedented escalation. Iran’s promised retaliation may target not just Israel but U.S. bases or allies like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, potentially dragging these countries into the conflict.

Many regional actors are deeply interconnected. For instance, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthi rebels in Yemen, and militias in Iraq and Syria are aligned with Iran and may open additional fronts against Israel or U.S. interests. Similarly, Israeli allies such as Jordan and Egypt are watching developments closely, fearing spillover violence or refugee crises.

Moreover, the conflict comes at a time when the region is already unstable, with tensions high in Gaza, Syria, and the Red Sea. The involvement of global powers—like the U.S., Russia, and China—each with their own stakes, adds to the risk.

While no country may desire a full-scale regional war, the combination of high emotions, strategic assets at stake, and deep mutual distrust could create a situation where even a single misstep or provocation spirals into widespread armed conflict.