US' Iran strikes are most consequential and riskiest foreign policy decision of Trump’s presidency
22 June 2025, 13:45
The US airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities mark a pivotal escalation in Middle Eastern geopolitics and US national security strategy.
Listen to this article
Loading audio...
By directly targeting Iran’s most fortified nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, President Trump has not only deprived Tehran of immediate nuclear leverage but also sent a forceful message to adversaries and allies alike.
The strikes were designed to decapitate Iran’s nuclear program, signalling Washington’s resolve to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. According to initial assessments, the operation employed significant munitions and precision targeting, reflecting high-level US military and intelligence coordination.
While the White House claims the program has been “obliterated,” the true extent of the damage—and whether Iran’s nuclear ambitions are permanently thwarted—remains uncertain pending further intelligence and on-the-ground verification.
The attack has triggered immediate condemnation from Iran, which has labelled the US actions as a “dangerous war” and a violation of international law. Iraq, a crucial regional actor, warns that the strikes threaten Middle Eastern stability and could provoke a wider conflict with global ramifications.
The risk of escalation is acute: Iran retains a robust arsenal of asymmetric tools, including proxy militias, cyber capabilities, and the potential to disrupt global oil flows by threatening the Strait of Hormuz.
From a national security perspective, the strikes serve a dual purpose.
First, they reinforce US deterrence by demonstrating a willingness to use force when core interests are at stake, despite longstanding promises to avoid “forever wars”.
Second, the operation sends an unmistakable signal to Russia and China—both of whom have supported Iran diplomatically and economically—that the US remains willing and able to act unilaterally to defend its interests and those of its allies in the region.
Despite the tactical success, the strategic risks are profound. Tehran may seek to retaliate through asymmetric means, targeting US personnel, allies, or interests worldwide.
The potential for a cycle of escalation remains high, with the spectre of a broader regional war looming. Additionally, the strikes could strain US relations with European and Gulf partners, many of whom fear the destabilizing effects of a protracted conflict with Iran.
The US bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites marks the most consequential—and riskiest—foreign policy decision of Trump’s presidency.
It has temporarily checked Iran’s nuclear ambitions and reasserted American military dominance, but it also opens the door to unpredictable retaliation and regional instability. As the world awaits Iran’s response, the stakes for US national security and global order have rarely been higher.
Matt Shoemaker is a former intelligence officer with the Defense Intelligence Agency.
LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest.
The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position.
To contact us email opinion@lbc.co.uk
