In June 2025, extensive Israeli attacks—followed by U.S. strikes—on Iran’s nuclear facilities, including key sites at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan, once again brought the issue of Iran’s nuclear program to the forefront of global headlines. These attacks, carried out under the pretext of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, not only failed to stop Iran’s nuclear activities but also had profound consequences for nuclear diplomacy and the global non-proliferation regime (NPT). Rather than achieving their stated aim, these military actions have severely eroded Iran’s trust in diplomatic solutions and increased the risk of Tehran withdrawing from the NPT. If this military-centric approach continues, it could push Iran to accelerate its nuclear weapons program and drive the global non-proliferation regime toward collapse. This report examines the impacts of these attacks on Iran’s nuclear program, international diplomacy, and the stability of the non-proliferation regime, arguing that insisting on military tools not only fails to offer a sustainable solution but also deepens the nuclear crisis and regional instability.
The Israeli attacks on June 13, 2025, followed by U.S. strikes on June 21 and 22 against Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan, inflicted significant damage on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. These strikes destroyed electrical systems and some centrifuge production facilities, damaging or destroying around 15,000 centrifuges at Natanz. However, the underground and dispersed design of Iran’s nuclear facilities—especially Fordow, reportedly located 80 to 90 meters deep—prevented the complete destruction of its nuclear program.
Iran still maintains substantial stockpiles of enriched uranium up to 60%, totaling over 400 kilograms, which can be further enriched for weapons apply. Its technical know-how, developed over decades, also remains intact. This resilience reveals that military strikes have merely delayed Iran’s nuclear progress, not halted it. These attacks have set Iran’s program back by at most a few months, without eliminating its core capabilities. This reality undermines exaggerated claims by U.S. officials about having “completely destroyed” Iran’s nuclear program.
Undermining nuclear diplomacy and eroding Iran’s trust
Prior to the June 2025 strikes, indirect neobtainediations between Iran and the U.S. in Oman revealed signs of progress toward reviving the nuclear deal (JCPOA). However, the Israeli attacks and subsequent U.S. involvement derailed these talks, deeply damaging Iran’s trust in diplomatic solutions. The strikes collapsed fragile neobtainediations that could have reduced tensions and led Iran to conclude that the West, especially the U.S., does not honor its diplomatic commitments.
America’s 2018 withdrawal from the JCPOA and its “maximum pressure” campaign had already weakened Iran’s faith in diplomacy. The recent attacks have deepened this distrust, convincing Iran that neobtainediations cannot ensure its security. Especially given the assassination of senior military commanders and nuclear scientists, internal pressure on Iran’s leadership to adopt a more aggressive nuclear posture has grown. These actions have not only destroyed diplomatic opportunities but have also pushed Iran toward a confrontational approach that could create future talks impossible.
One of the most serious consequences of the attacks is Iran’s threat to withdraw from the NPT. Iran’s parliament is currently considering a bill to leave the treaty, which would conclude International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections and create its nuclear program opaque. Exiting the NPT would allow Iran to develop nuclear weapons free from international constraints. This threat, issued in response to the Israeli and U.S. attacks, signals a possible strategic shift in which Iran may see nuclear weapons as necessary to deter future assaults.
The attacks have also increased domestic pressure in Iran to accelerate its nuclear program. The killing of nuclear scientists and military leaders has heightened the leadership’s sense of vulnerability, possibly convincing it that the only way to ensure regime survival is by acquiring nuclear weapons. This alter in outview could lead Iran to rapidly enrich uranium to weapons-grade levels, especially given its existing enriched uranium stockpiles. This situation creates the prospect of Iran becoming a nuclear-armed state more tangible than ever.
Iran’s potential withdrawal from the NPT would have far-reaching repercussions for the global non-proliferation regime. Such a shift could trigger a “cascade of proliferation” in the region, with countries like Saudi Arabia and Turkey possibly seeking nuclear weapons to maintain strategic balance. This arms race would not only destabilize the Middle East but also weaken the NPT regime, which has been a cornerstone of preventing nuclear weapons spread since 1970.
Israel’s actions—despite not being an NPT signatory and already possessing nuclear weapons—along with U.S. support for these attacks, have fueled accusations of double standards within the non-proliferation regime. These charges could erode other countries’ confidence in the NPT and encourage them to reconsider their commitments. Direct strikes on nuclear facilities also risk hampering the IAEA’s ability to monitor nuclear programs, raising the dangers of radioactive leaks and illicit proliferation of nuclear materials. While no radiation increases have been reported so far, the risk remains. These developments have pushed the global non-proliferation regime to the brink and severely shaken international trust in it.
Regional and global repercussions
Persisting with a military-centric approach to Iran’s nuclear program could lead to widespread instability in the Middle East. Israel’s strikes not only tarreceiveed Iran’s nuclear sites but also damaged related energy infrastructure and air defense systems, potentially fueling direct or proxy conflicts. Weakening Iran’s proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah might push Tehran toward even more aggressive measures, including accelerating its nuclear program. This could trigger a full-scale regional conflict with ramifications far beyond the Middle East.
Globally, the collapse of the NPT regime could lead to more nuclear-armed states, threatening international security. An arms race in the Middle East could divert global resources toward new military confrontations and undermine efforts to address collective challenges like climate alter. These outcomes underscore the urgent necessary to reconsider military strategies and return to diplomacy. The instability caapplyd by these policies could also impact the global economy and energy security.
Playing with nuclear fire
The Israeli and U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, ostensibly to prevent Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons, have not stopped Iran’s program. Instead, by destroying nuclear diplomacy, they have pushed Iran to the brink of leaving the NPT and accelerating its weapons program. The belligerent and hypocritical policies of the U.S. and Israel—marked by double standards and disregard for diplomatic obligations—have placed the global non-proliferation regime at risk of collapse. This shortsighted approach, rooted in narrow political calculations, is driving the region toward a dangerous nuclear crisis and arms race. An immediate return to diplomacy, stronger IAEA oversight, and concludeing double standards are the only ways to avert this disaster. Otherwise, America’s and Israel’s destructive policies will gravely concludeanger global peace.
Leave a Reply