By any measure, Israel’s sweeping overnight airstrikes on Iran mark the most dangerous escalation the Middle East has witnessed in decades.
Codenamed “Operation Rising Lion”, the offensive targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities, military bases, and command centres, reportedly killing three of the Islamic Republic’s most senior generals and several top nuclear scientists.
The immediate goal of the operation: cripple Iran’s nuclear ambitions and paralyse its ability to retaliate.
But what began as a pre-emptive strike could easily ignite the regional war long feared by strategists and diplomats alike.
Israel’s decision was far from impulsive. Since Iran’s nuclear programme started unnerving Israeli intelligence in the early 2000s, pre-emptive military action has remained on the table.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, more than any other Israeli leader, warned repeatedly that Tehran was inching toward a nuclear breakout, often accusing the international community of apathy. Now, Israeli officials claim that Iran has amassed sufficient amounts of enriched uranium to assemble multiple nuclear warheads within days.
What is striking is the precision and scale of Israel’s opening salvo. Echoing the first phase of its war on Hezbollah last year, Israel focused on decapitating the enemy’s military leadership. Brig. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri, Gen. Hossein Salami of the IRGC, and Gen. Gholam Ali Rashid are all reportedly among the dead.
The strikes also targeted key nuclear and missile sites, including Natanz, Iran’s main uranium enrichment facility.
Whether Israel has succeeded in damaging Iran’s deeply buried centrifuges remains unclear, but what is certain is that the Middle East has entered a perilous new chapter.
The signs of impending conflict were plain to see. The US State Department’s evacuation of non-essential staff from Baghdad, heightened security at embassies, and the International Atomic Energy Agency’s damning censure of Iran’s nuclear breaches all foreshadowed the storm.
While Washington denies direct involvement, it is inconceivable that Israel acted without at least tacit American awareness if not quiet encouragement. The choreography of crisis had been carefully set. Iran’s response so far has been measured. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has vowed “harsh punishment” for Israel, but has so far refrained from threatening US forces or Gulf oil infrastructure.
Still, the risk of escalation is undeniable. Iran could unleash missile barrages on Israel, target American bases, or disrupt shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint for a fifth of the world’s oil. Oil prices have already surged, underscoring the fragility of the global economy in the face of Middle Eastern conflicts.
This crisis lays bare the contradictions of US policy. While US President Donald Trump and his administration speak of diplomacy and restraint, the reality is more complex.
By enabling or at least not restraining Israel’s strikes, Washington risks becoming entangled in a war it claims to want to avoid. It is a familiar balancing act: supporting Israel’s security imperatives while maintaining plausible deniability and trying to keep open the door for negotiations. Yet history teaches us that pre-emptive strikes rarely deliver lasting security. They may delay a weapons programme or eliminate key figures, but they do not resolve deeper animosities or strategic rivalries.
Indeed, Iran now has every incentive, politically and militarily, to pursue the very nuclear capability Israel hoped to prevent.
The risk of miscalculation is immense, and the potential for the conflict to engulf Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and beyond is real.
For Israel, the challenge is whether these strikes have dealt a decisive blow or merely lit the fuse of a broader war. For Iran, the calculus is equally fraught: retaliate too forcefully and risk direct US intervention, or respond too weakly and invite further attacks.
And for Washington, the task is to navigate the treacherous space between alliance commitments and accountability between supporting Israel and averting a regional catastrophe.
One thing is certain: the era of ambiguity over Iran’s nuclear programme is over. What lies ahead is a test of diplomacy’s resilience under fire and of the world’s capacity to prevent another Middle Eastern war that no one can afford.
Mohamed Fahmy is the editor-in-chief of The Egyptian Gazette and Egyptian Mail newspapers
