\u201cWe are certainly interested [in] de-escalation,\u201d Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told NBC News after the strikes. \u201cThis is a war of choice by the United States, and they have to pay for that.\u201d<\/p>\n
To better understand the potential fallout, CFR experts provide assessments of the brewing conflict.\u00a0<\/p>\n
The Attack on Iran Will Not Kill the Islamic Republic<\/p>\n
Ray Takeyh is\u00a0Hasib J. Sabbagh senior fellow for Middle East studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Bombing a regime out of extinction is rarely an effective strategy.<\/p>\n
The United States and Israel have launched another wave of attack on Iran. The scale of this assault and who remains alive in the Iranian leadership are yet to be determined. But the Islamic Republic is an ideological system with a multi-layered elite and base of support. That support may have shrunk in the past few years, but it still provides the regime with a cadre prepared to use force to maintain power. The suppression of the recent uprising demonstrated that defeat abroad does not translate to weakness at home. The theocracy will likely survive the latest bombing\u2014battered and bruised, but standing.<\/p>\n
It is time to say farewell to arms control. The fact is that the Iranians were engaged in serious negotiations with U.S. officials. News accounts indicate that Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had tabled proposals that called for the suspension of uranium enrichment for several years before allowing it to then resume at low levels. Perhaps more could have been extracted from Iran if diplomacy had more time than a mere two weeks and two sessions. The Iranian side was trying to be imaginative in addressing U.S. concerns. All this has now ended, as the Trump administration opted for military attacks while the talks were unfolding. It would not be unreasonable for Iranian officials to assume that diplomacy was a mere ruse before the bombs fell.<\/p>\n
Iran\u2019s clerical leaders had to respond. Reports indicate they have targeted U.S. bases in the region, as well as Israel. It will take some time to assess the full scope of their attacks and whether there were any U.S. casualties. Should American soldiers die, then the administration will face significant pressure to strike Iran again as punishment for its conduct. An escalatory cycle can only end if cool heads prevail, and there is little evidence today that there are cool heads in either capital.<\/p>\n
Iran Strikes Highlight Exceptional U.S.-Israeli Coordination<\/p>\n
Elliott Abrams is senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies at the Council on Foreign Relations. He previously served as a special representative for Iran and Venezuela in the first Trump administration.<\/p>\n
Israelis are spending another day in bomb shelters to protect themselves from Iranian attacks, but this time is different.<\/p>\n
First, the Iranian salvos follow a carefully planned, simultaneous U.S.-Israeli operation. Israeli sources have said that the date of the attack was agreed upon two weeks ago. The ongoing and exceptionally close cooperation between the U.S. military and the Israeli Defense Forces\u2014and between President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu\u2014has reached a new high. The safest assumption is that the joint Trump-Netanyahu decision to attack Iran was made during Netanyahu\u2019s\u00a0visit to Washington two weeks ago.<\/p>\n
Second, the objective is not to merely degrade the Iranian nuclear weapons sites or hit its missile launchers, but force regime change. Trump was clear about that in his first statement<\/a>. This marks a profound change in stated Israeli and U.S. goals: while the fall of the regime has long been wished for, it has never been the objective of a joint military campaign, nor has any U.S. president so directly called upon Iranians to rise up. Iran is the greatest security threat to Israel, so this change in U.S. objectives will be warmly welcomed.<\/p>\n Third, this is a campaign, not a one-off strike. No end date has been set, so Israel can likely count on U.S. involvement until hostilities cease.<\/p>\n For Netanyahu, the joint campaign is another display of his close relationship with Trump, and it will strengthen the Israeli leader politically. This is an election year in Israel, and a successful joint operation against Iran will help Netanyahu maintain the sense, for many Israeli voters, that he is uniquely positioned to deal with Israel\u2019s enemies.<\/p>\n Israel is being hit with everything Iran can throw at it, including waves of missiles and drones, and there will be damage and casualties. Israelis know that their much-vaunted and highly effective air defenses are not impenetrable. Given Iran\u2019s strikes on U.S. military targets based in neighboring Gulf countries, Israelis will assume that no targets in their country are off-limits, including purely civilian sites such as office buildings or hospitals. They know the coming week will be extremely difficult, and already their country is isolated by the closure of its air space and airports.<\/p>\n In a deeper sense, however, Israel is not alone. Not only is it in a close partnership with the United States, but also with several of their Arab neighbors\u2014including Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates\u2014who are also under attack by Iran. Together, these countries share a common adversary and will have much to discuss through in diplomatic, intelligence, and military channels about Iran\u2019s attacks and its postwar future. Israelis will wonder today whether, after decades hearing the Iranian regime shout \u201cDeath to Israel,\u201d a new era is coming in the Middle East.<\/p>\n Iran\u2019s Arab Neighbors, Targeted in Reprisals, Brace for Iranian Instability<\/p>\n Steven A. Cook is Eni Enrico Mattei senior fellow for Middle East and Africa studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.<\/p>\n Unlike the U.S. strikes on Iran\u2019s nuclear facilities in June 2025, President Donald Trump\u2019s Operation Epic Fury seeks to topple the Islamic Republic. It is a risky strategy given the enormous challenges of trying to engineer regime change from thousands of miles away. The president clearly hopes that the large numbers of Iranians who have been in revolt<\/a> against their government for some time will take matters into their own hands and bring an end to clerical rule.<\/p>\n The uncertainty of both military operations and regime change has left governments in the region on edge. Ahead of U.S. military operations, Gulf states made clear they would not participate in any attack on Iran, though they are likely providing technical assistance to the United States given their responsibilities as U.S. Central Command partners.<\/p>\n As is often the case,\u00a0regional governments\u2019 positions are more nuanced\u00a0than their public pronouncements would suggest. The leadership of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates\u00a0(UAE)\u00a0do not want to get dragged into a conflict and are concerned that potential chaos in Iran will affect the trillion-dollar bets they are making on their domestic transformations. Yet they are hardly supporters of the Iranian regime. After the Iranians retaliated this morning with attacks on\u00a0Bahrain, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE\u2014which all host U.S. military personnel\u2014the\u00a0Saudis\u00a0condemned<\/a>\u00a0Iran\u00a0and offered to put their \u201ccapabilities at the disposal in support of any measures\u00a0[the Arab states] may undertake.\u201d The Emiratis intercepted Iranian ballistic missiles and have\u00a0reserved the right\u00a0to respond. No one in any leadership position in Abu Dhabi or Riyadh will lament the passing of the Iranian regime should the Islamic Republic fall.\u00a0<\/p>\n Doha has had better relations with Iran than other Gulf states, but Qatar issued a strong condemnation of Iran\u2019s retaliatory strikes on its territory. Relations between the two countries were already strained after Iran fired on Al Udeid Air Base (near Doha) last summer. Still, Qatar will continue to share a massive gas field with Iran and thus must manage the bilateral relationship. For its part, Oman\u2019s government condemned the U.S. military operations. Its foreign minister, Badr bin Hamad al-Busaidi, was in the United States on the eve of military operations lobbying the Trump administration against an attack.<\/p>\n Uncertainty will be the watchword for Gulf leaders in the coming days, weeks, and months. Now that military action has begun, their greatest fear is likely the survival of the Iranian regime. They do not want a weakened, vengeful regime as a neighbor.<\/p>\n Trump\u2019s Iran War Aims Are Ambitious\u2014and Mostly Unachievable<\/p>\n Max Boot is the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick senior fellow for national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.<\/p>\n It\u2019s easy to start a war. It\u2019s very hard to end one successfully.<\/p>\n That is a lesson that President George W. Bush learned in Iraq and Afghanistan\u2014and previous presidents before him, in places ranging from Vietnam to Somalia. It is a lesson that President Donald Trump is likely to learn anew in Iran.<\/p>\n