The United States launched Operation Midnight Hammer, a significant attack on Iran’s nuclear installations in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, on June 21, 2025. The attack involved seven B‑2 stealth bombers dropping fourteen 30,000‑pound bunker‑buster bombs, supported by submarine‑launched Tomahawk missiles. These strikes marked a clear escalation in U.S. military intervention in the region following Israel’s offensive on June 13.
President Donald Trump called the mission a “spectacular military success,” claiming Iran’s key enrichment sites were “completely and totally obliterated.” Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth echoed his confidence, stating the attack had “buried under a mountain of rubble” Iran’s capacity to pursue nuclear weapons.
Assessing the damage and its limits
What satellite imagery and assessments show
Though early U.S. information indicates the strike only delayed Iran’s nuclear progress by months, not years, satellite photographs of Fordow show six enormous craters atop the site. Iran’s nuclear command claimed the core of its program remains intact and personnel were evacuated in time. The IAEA warns that destroying monitoring infrastructure could force inspections into a “cat‑and‑mouse” scenario.
Non‑Proliferation Treaty in peril
Iran’s parliament has voted to halt IAEA cooperation and is discussing withdrawal from the NPT. IAEA head Rafael Grossi cautioned that military assault on nuclear infrastructure threatens global monitoring and could have severe environmental fallout, particularly around sites like Bushehr.
Setting a dangerous precedent
Striking nuclear sites may undermine international norms established after World War II. UN experts have condemned the strikes, claiming they violate the fundamental tenets of the UN Charter and may be an act of aggression.
This can be viewed by other countries as a license to do the same to nuclear facilities thus leading to preemptive attacks and the rise of new regional arms races.
Regional and global fallout
Iran retaliated by launching missiles on a U.S base located in Qatar, but there were no casualties. However, 657 individuals have previously died in Iran as a result of Israel-Iran conflicts, 263 of whom were civilians. In Iran there were 24 deaths as a result of Iran related attacks in Israel.
Saudi Arabia and Russia described the U.S action as being titillating and a dangerously provocative move. UN Secretary General Anto Guterres asked for restraint and diplomacy. The brittle ceasefire still hangs precariously as both sides are threatening to act anew.
Nuclear and environmental hazards
Although such attacks did not target reactor plants, only the enrichment sites, the example bothers analysts. The warnings issued by the IAEA on the compounding effect of radio absorbent risks reiterates on the dangers posed by targeting nuclear facilities to those within the environment.
Legality and international norms
Legal scholars have pointed out that the strike violates not just the NPT but also the UN Charter’s prohibition on war aggression. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi accused the U.S. of infringing on Iran’s sovereignty and international law, declaring: “Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interests, and people.”
Conversely, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised the operation, stating: “Congratulations, President Trump. Your courageous choice to strike Iran’s nuclear installations… will alter history.”
Strategic trade‑offs
The U.S. framed the strike as necessary to halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions and protect Israel. Secretary Hegseth said the strikes “obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons,” while Vance added that Iran is “much further away from a nuclear program today than they were 24 hours ago.”
Despite this, intelligence estimates and analysts suggest any delay to Iran’s program is temporary. Without effective monitoring, Iran may now accelerate its efforts in secret, risking global stability.
Voices from civil society and analysts
Environmental and humanitarian groups caution that military strikes could harm humanitarian efforts and undermine long-standing nuclear negotiations. They stress that destabilizing the nuclear extensions could spark regional proliferation.
A defining moment for global nuclear order
These events mark a turning point in international nuclear norms. The operation’s immediate success does not eliminate long‑term risks. Possible disintegration of non‑proliferation regimes and the precedence of the law to attack nuclear facilities deserve attention.
Iran’s actions following the strike, including its determination to leave the NPT and to obstruct inspections, demonstrate how the military can yield short-term gains while devoting those gains to long-term security. Absent the renewal of diplomacy and the establishment of effective methods of verification, the world runs the threat of downhill into the growing proliferation and war.
