In a stunning and controversial military escalation, U.S. President Donald Trump announced on Saturday, June 21 that American forces had carried out what he called a “highly successful” airstrike on three of Iran’s major nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The strike, which followed a series of Israeli attacks across Iran over the prior nine days, marks a dangerous turning point in the regional conflict and raises serious concerns over the legality, effectiveness, and human cost of the U.S. strikes.
Trump claimed on Truth Social that Fordow had been “destroyed” by a full payload of bunker-busting bombs, adding that all U.S. aircraft had safely exited Iranian airspace. He described the operation as a historic moment for the U.S., Israel, and the world, declaring: “Now is the time for peace.” But what followed was far from peace.
The U.S. and Israeli strikes have had devastating impacts on civilians, especially in Iran. According to independent sources, Iranian media, and emergency officials, the death toll has now surpassed 1,000, the vast majority of them civilians. These include women, children, elderly citizens, and medical personnel who were targeted or became collateral damage in missile strikes and aerial bombardments across multiple cities.
The bombing of Fordow, while allegedly aimed at underground centrifuges, reportedly sent shockwaves through the nearby city of Qom, destroying homes and clinics. In addition to the U.S. attack on nuclear facilities, Israeli fighter jets have also targeted key military and internal security installations, including Evin Prison, which houses hundreds of political prisoners and dual nationals, Basij paramilitary bases in Tehran and Karaj, and IRGC intelligence headquarters, including the Seyyed-al-Shohada Division and Sarallah Base, responsible for Tehran’s internal security.
On the strikes on Evin prison on June 23, footage confirmed that sections of Evin Prison were damaged, sparking panic among detainees. Israeli officials defended the strike, claiming these were centers of repression, but human rights groups called the attacks “reckless” and “indiscriminate,” endangering the lives of prisoners with no due process.
According to Mohammad Habibi, a prominent civil rights figure, the Israeli strike on Evin Prison resulted in the deaths of inmates along with several prison guards and conscripted soldiers. Members of the transgender community and those imprisoned for financial offenses were among the prisoners who were killed and injured in the strike. The surviving detainees were reportedly transferred to Fashafouyeh (Greater Tehran Prison), raising concerns about overcrowding and the safety of vulnerable populations.
The attacks on Basij and IRGC bases also resulted in heavy casualties. A high number of security personnel—particularly conscripted soldiers—were reported killed. In Iran, all male citizens are required by law to serve two years in the military starting at age 18. These young men are not volunteers but are drafted into service, often placed in sensitive roles at IRGC or Basij bases. The death of these conscripts—many barely out of high school—has sparked national grief and anger, including among families who have little support to the Iranian government.
Despite President Trump’s bold declaration that “Fordow is gone,” leading non-governmental military analysts have cast doubt on the extent of the damage. Experts including Jeffrey Lewis of the Middlebury Institute and David Albright of the Institute for Science and International Security analyzed satellite imagery and concluded that many core elements of the site appear intact. Satellite photos reveal six large craters near the site—three believed to target the ventilation system, and three aimed at the centrifuge hall. However, Lewis noted: “If this is all there is, then it was a deeply incomplete operation. We cannot even confirm whether Iran’s 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium were hit or moved.” Iranian trucks were seen in satellite images before the attack, possibly sealing entrances and moving materials, suggesting Tehran may have anticipated the strike and preserved its assets. This sets the stage for Iran to potentially move to enrich its stockpile to weapons grade, out of site of international inspectors.
Iran’s response came on Monday, June 23 under the name “Operation Basharat al-Fath” (Good News of Victory). The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps announced that it had launched a powerful and coordinated missile attack on the Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the largest U.S. military installation in the region. According to Iranian armed forces, the operation was carried out under the direction of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council and the central command base of Khatam al-Anbiya. Multiple explosions were reported in Doha and Lusail, with visible projectiles lighting up the sky. Iran’s Supreme National Security Council stated that the number of missiles used matched the number of bombs dropped by the U.S. on Iran’s nuclear facilities—14 in total. The statement emphasized that the targeted base was located far from urban centers or civilian infrastructure, implying an effort to avoid civilian casualties.
Qatar condemned the attack as a “blatant violation of national sovereignty” and reserved the right to respond under international law. However, Qatari defense officials confirmed that all incoming Iranian missiles were successfully intercepted and that the base had been evacuated before the attack, resulting in no casualties. The New York Times reported that Iran had notified Qatari officials in advance, signaling its intent to avoid escalation with Doha while still striking a symbolic blow against U.S. forces.
Inside Iran, Israel’s attacks have triggered an emotional and political earthquake across the ideological spectrum. Many civil society organizations, including teacher unions, labor groups, and political prisoners, have issued statements condemning the attacks while emphasizing the need to defend Iran’s territorial integrity—regardless of the regime. The Coordinating Council of Iranian Teachers’ Unions stated: “This military aggression by Israel is a blatant violation of international law and a threat to the lives of innocent civilians. It must be condemned by all nations.” Former political prisoner Alireza Rajaei, who lost an eye and part of his face due to cancer developed in prison, warned in a televised message: “This is a national war. The greatest threat to Iran’s existence since the wars with Russia. America and Europe deceived Iran in nuclear talks and enabled Israel’s aggression. Do not fall for the propaganda that this is merely a regime war. It is a war on the nation, and we must stand united against invasion and treachery.”
In stark contrast, some opposition groups outside Iran are either supporting the Israeli strike or attempting to exploit the chaos to instigate a militarized regime change. The Monarchist factions, the MKO, Jaish al-Adl, and Pejak have each issued statements reflecting divergent motives. Jaish al-Adl described the war as unrelated to national interests, calling it “a war of the regime” and labeled Iran’s actions as historical crimes against Baluchis and other minorities. They welcomed the strikes as an opportunity to overthrow the regime. Pejak (Kurdish Free Life Party) issued a statement urging solidarity between Iranian Kurds and Azeris, calling for ethnic unity and the formation of grassroots democratic councils, while warning against regime manipulation and foreign provocation. They framed the war as a historical moment for democratic self-determination.
Among the more vocal figures in exile was Reza Pahlavi, the exiled former Crown Prince of Iran, who held a press conference in Paris and accused Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his “destructive and criminal cult” of dragging Iran into economic and military collapse. “This war was started by Ali Khamenei,” he declared, blaming him for looting national infrastructure, wasting public wealth on a nuclear weapons program, and dismantling Iran’s internal security while hijacking national sovereignty. “The regime has failed and is on the edge of collapse,” he stated, calling this moment the beginning of a “new era for Iran.” He further claimed that credible reports indicate senior regime figures, including Khamenei’s own family, are preparing to flee the country, and that Khamenei himself is directing the war from a bunker while using civilians as human shields. “The democracy we seek,” he added, “will be based on territorial integrity, individual freedom, and the separation of religion from politics.”
Meanwhile, inside Iran, the judiciary executed Mohammad Amin Mahdavi Shayesteh, a 26-year-old political prisoner, on charges of “intelligence cooperation” with Israel. He is the third person executed on similar charges since the war began. According to the official judiciary news agency Mizan, Shayesteh was described as the head of a cyber team allegedly affiliated with Mossad and was accused of knowingly working with what the authorities called a “terrorist-intelligence service.” He was also labeled a virtual “collaborator” with Iran International, an opposition news network that later denied any connection with him. Reports earlier confirmed that Shayesteh’s death sentence had been upheld by Iran’s Supreme Court, despite appeals. He had originally been sentenced to death by Judge Salavati in Branch 15 of the Revolutionary Court. After the verdict, he was transferred from Ward 4 of Evin Prison to Ghezel Hesar Prison’s high-security wing, reserved for murder convicts. Requests for his return to the political ward were denied. Human rights organizations previously reported that his confession was obtained under torture and that his trial was conducted without due process. According to the Iran Human Rights organization, Judge Kuhkamarei affirmed the verdict “without consideration of the defense.”
Though President Trump celebrated Saturday’s attack as a deterrent to Iran’s nuclear ambitions, many experts argue that the Fordow strike may backfire. The Iranian nuclear program—despite decades of sabotage and assassination—has proven resilient. U.S. intelligence itself admits uncertainty about whether Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was affected. Moreover, Iran’s civilian casualties, the legal ambiguity of the strike, and the lack of a clear strategic endpoint have drawn international criticism. Russia condemned the attack as unprovoked. China has called for de-escalation, and the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog warned of “grave consequences” if such attacks continue. Even within the U.S., questions are mounting: Was this operation a show of strength or a hasty gamble that may push the region into a wider war?
Iran now faces a critical crossroads: whether to retaliate further, risking full-scale war, or hold fire and potentially negotiate amid attacks and potentially, a position of comparable weakness. The Iranian government has not ruled out returning to the negotiation table—but only on its own terms, and only after ensuring that its civilian and national dignity are defended. Meanwhile, families in both Iran and Israel mourn their dead, and millions in the region brace for what comes next.