On Saturday, June 21, 2025, US President Donald Trump announced a military operation targeting three of Iran’s nuclear facilities: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Described as “highly successful,” the attack involved high-powered bombs, including a full payload dropped on Fordow, Iran’s primary uranium enrichment facility. The operation was carried out by B-2 stealth bombers, which have since left Iranian airspace, according to Trump. The action, marking a significant escalation in the conflict involving the US, Israel, and Iran, comes amid rising tensions over Iran’s nuclear program. Trump praised the US military’s capabilities and suggested the moment is ripe for pursuing peace in the region.
Shared by Trump on his Truth Social platform, the news sparked immediate international reactions. The attack followed weeks of speculation about potential US military intervention against Iran, particularly after Israel intensified its operations against Iranian nuclear targets since June 13. The operation unfolds against a backdrop of stalled diplomatic negotiations, with Trump demanding Iran completely abandon its uranium enrichment program.
- Operation targets: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, key facilities in Iran’s nuclear program.
- Means used: B-2 stealth bombers carrying GBU-57 “bunker buster” bombs.
- Stated goal: Neutralize Iran’s capacity to develop nuclear weapons.
Trump’s announcement reinforces his hardline stance against Iran, a recurring promise since his presidential campaign. Below, details on the operation and its global implications.
Details of the military operation
The US military operation targeted three of Iran’s primary nuclear facilities. Fordow, located in a mountain south of Tehran, is known for its fortified underground structure, designed to withstand airstrikes. Natanz, the country’s largest uranium enrichment facility, has been targeted previously, including a suspected 2010 cyberattack attributed to the US and Israel. Isfahan hosts a nuclear research center and produces strategic materials.
The use of GBU-57 “bunker buster” bombs was critical to striking Fordow, whose underground design requires high-penetration weaponry. Each B-2 bomber can carry up to two of these 13.6-ton bombs, capable of penetrating up to 60 meters of rock or concrete. The choice of this armament reflects the intent to inflict significant damage on the facilities, potentially delaying Iran’s nuclear program for years.
While Trump described the operation as a success, no detailed information on the exact impact has been released. Iranian authorities have not yet provided an official assessment of damages or casualties, but initial reports suggest Iran’s air defenses failed to intercept the US stealth bombers.
Background of the conflict
The attack comes at a time of heightened tension in the Middle East, marked by a series of clashes between Israel and Iran. Since June 13, Israel has conducted an air campaign against Iranian targets, including nuclear and military facilities, claiming Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon. These actions were prompted by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports indicating Iran had amassed 400 kg of uranium enriched to 60%, a level near that required for a nuclear bomb.
Under Trump’s leadership, the US initially pursued a diplomatic solution, with negotiations mediated by countries like Oman and Qatar. However, Iran’s refusal to fully abandon its uranium enrichment program led to an escalation in US threats. On June 17, Trump demanded Iran’s “unconditional surrender,” warning that any attack on US interests would be met with overwhelming force.
International reactions
The military operation triggered a wave of global responses. Gulf nations like Qatar expressed concern over the attack’s implications for regional stability and energy markets. The possibility of Iran retaliating by blocking the Strait of Hormuz, through which over 17 million barrels of oil pass daily, worries economic analysts.
Russia and China, Iran’s allies, have not yet issued official statements, but European diplomats have begun efforts to de-escalate the conflict. The UK, through Foreign Secretary David Lammy, advocated for a negotiated solution, while France and Germany plan meetings with Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, in Geneva.
- Qatar: Condemned attacks on nuclear facilities due to risks to energy security.
- UK: Proposed dialogue to avoid regional escalation.
- Iran: Vowed an “irreversible” response to further military actions.
- Israel: Celebrated the operation as a significant blow to Iran’s nuclear program.
Risks of retaliation
Despite being weakened by Israeli attacks that destroyed parts of its air defense systems, Iran retains the capacity to respond. Iranian officials have threatened retaliation against US bases in the Persian Gulf or Israeli targets. Iran could also mobilize regional proxies, such as Yemen’s Houthis, who have vowed to attack US ships in the Red Sea if the US becomes directly involved.
Another risk is Iran’s potential withdrawal from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), which could accelerate its efforts to develop nuclear weapons. A bill to this effect is already under consideration in Iran’s parliament, though the government insists its nuclear policy remains peaceful.
History of Iran’s nuclear program
Iran’s nuclear program has been a source of international tension since 2002, when secret facilities were uncovered. In 2015, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was signed between Iran and global powers, limiting uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief. However, in 2018, Trump withdrew the US from the agreement, reimposing sanctions and prompting Iran to escalate its nuclear activities.
Since then, Iran has increased its enrichment capacity, installing thousands of advanced centrifuges. In 2025, the IAEA reported that Iran possessed uranium enriched to near-weapons-grade levels, though no evidence suggests Iran has resumed its weapons program halted in 2003.
Israel’s role in the escalation
Israel has played a central role in the recent escalation against Iran. Since October 2023, the country has intensified operations against Iranian proxies, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza, weakening Tehran’s regional influence. In 2024, Israel destroyed Iranian air defense systems, facilitating airstrikes on nuclear targets.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu argued that the current moment is ideal to neutralize Iran’s nuclear program, citing Iran’s temporary vulnerability. The US operation, though conducted independently, aligns with Israel’s strategic objectives.
Challenges for diplomacy
Despite the attack, diplomatic efforts continue. Iran has signaled willingness to negotiate, but only if attacks cease. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the country is “fully prepared” for a negotiated solution but will not accept military pressure.
Negotiations face significant hurdles. Mutual distrust between the US and Iran, exacerbated by years of sanctions and confrontations, complicates reaching an agreement. Additionally, Israel’s push for a definitive military solution hinders mediation efforts by European and Gulf nations.
Global energy scenario
The attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities have raised concerns about energy market stability. Iran is a major global oil producer, and any disruption to its exports could drive up prices. The threat of a Strait of Hormuz blockade, though unlikely at present, remains a risk factor.
Analysts note that conflict escalation could impact not only oil prices but also maritime transport and global supply chains. Oil-dependent nations like India and South Korea are closely monitoring the situation.
US military perspective
The operation showcased US technological superiority, particularly the use of B-2 stealth bombers. These aircraft, capable of operating undetected by radar, were critical to the mission’s success. Trump’s emphasis on US military prowess reflects his strategy of projecting strength globally.
However, the decision to directly attack Iran marks a shift from Trump’s initial reluctance to engage in direct Middle East conflicts. During his campaign, he pledged to avoid prolonged wars, but pressure from Israel and the perceived imminent threat of Iran’s nuclear program appear to have altered his approach.
Regional security implications
The military operation heightens instability in the Middle East, a region already plagued by prolonged conflicts. The partial destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities may delay its nuclear program but does not eliminate its ability to resume it. Additionally, military escalation could strengthen hardline factions in Iran, complicating moderation efforts.
The potential for Iranian retaliation against US or Israeli targets keeps the region on edge. US military bases in Iraq, Syria, and the Persian Gulf are on high alert, while Israel bolsters its missile defense systems.
