Iran has promised a “proportionate response” to what it calls the United States’ “criminal aggression” after President Donald Trump confirmed that American forces had “obliterated” three of Iran’s nuclear facilities. While Trump hailed the strike as a military success, warning there were “many targets left,” Iran has vowed that its response will come; the only question is when and how.
Iran’s foreign ministry said the country would “defend its territory, sovereignty, security and people by all force and means.” The Iranian military is now reportedly in charge of planning a retaliatory strike, according to Iran’s UN envoy Amir Saeid Iravani, who told the Security Council that Washington had “decided to destroy diplomacy.”
“We will take all measures necessary,” Iravani said, adding that Iran’s response would be shaped by “timing, nature and scale” determined solely by its military.
Limited strikes or wider confrontation?
Iran’s dilemma lies in balancing a credible retaliation without triggering a full-scale regional war. It has experience with calibrated responses: following the 2020 US killing of General Qassem Soleimani, Tehran launched missiles at US bases in Iraq after warning them in advance. No lives were lost, but the message was clear.
This time, however, experts suggest Iran may avoid advance notice. According to the BBC, Tehran retains roughly half of its original 3,000 missiles and has already drawn up a list of some 20 US bases in the region, including key sites like At-Tanf, Ain al-Asad, and Erbil in Iraq and Syria. Proxies could also be activated to carry out these attacks, mirroring past strategies.
Sanam Vakil of Chatham House told The New York Times that Iran could strike “largely evacuated” US bases or re-activate regional partners like the Houthis in Yemen. Such a cautious, asymmetric campaign would allow Iran to maintain its image without escalating into direct confrontation.
The Strait of Hormuz and cyber warfare
Another option is economic warfare. Tehran could attempt to choke the Strait of Hormuz — the strategic waterway through which nearly a third of global oil flows. The BBC reported that Iran might deploy sea mines or fast-attack boats to block shipping lanes, potentially causing a spike in global oil prices.
Cyberattacks also remain a key tool in Iran’s arsenal. Alongside China, Russia and North Korea, Iran has cultivated advanced cyber capabilities. Attacks on US infrastructure or commercial entities could inflict damage without triggering immediate military retaliation.
“Iran knew this was coming and will have prepared a chain of responses,” said Ellie Geranmayeh of the European Council on Foreign Relations, warning that attacks “will be swift and multilayered.”
Retaliation could be delayed — or abandoned
There are voices within Iran’s leadership arguing for restraint. A delayed response striking back when US forces are no longer on high alert could allow Tehran to save face without risking immediate retribution. Symbolic attacks on diplomatic missions or targeted assassinations of US-linked figures abroad are also being considered.
However, such a strategy carries its own risks. Doing nothing may spare Iran further losses but risks weakening its domestic credibility. As conservative Tehran analyst Reza Salehi noted: “If we do not react, the US will not leave us alone.”
Some experts argue that the regime may ultimately choose to recalibrate rather than retaliate. This includes restarting diplomacy, potentially via neutral mediators in Muscat or Rome. Yet such a path would demand significant concessions, especially around its nuclear enrichment programme something the regime has historically resisted.
The nuclear question looms large
According to NYT reporting, Iran’s long-term takeaway from the strikes may be the need for a nuclear deterrent. Vali Nasr, an Iran scholar at Johns Hopkins University, said the strikes may push Iran to abandon cooperation with the IAEA and move towards nuclear armament.
“This is the great irony,” Geranmayeh told NYT. “Although Trump has sought to eliminate the nuclear threat from Iran, he has now made it far more likely that Iran becomes a nuclear state.”
Ayatollah Khamenei could authorise withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and expel international inspectors, effectively ending global oversight of Iran’s programme.
While the International Atomic Energy Agency reported no radiation leakage after the US strikes — implying enriched uranium was likely moved, concerns remain that Iran’s stockpile is now hidden and unmonitored.
'Hardliners in the Iranian regime may ultimately win the day'
Experts believe Iran now faces two critical choices. Jonathan Panikoff of the Atlantic Council explained: “Iran can choose to strike US bases in a limited fashion… or it could go all in and trigger a regional war.”
Refraining from retaliation may limit further military damage but risks weakening the regime’s image. “If we do not react, the US will not leave us alone,” said conservative Tehran analyst Reza Salehi.
A calculated response—such as targeting symbolic US sites—could appease hardliners without escalating to full-scale war. However, given Trump’s threats and the severity of the strikes, restraint seems unlikely. “Hardliners in the Iranian regime may ultimately win the day,” Panikoff noted, adding that asymmetric attacks or overseas terror operations remain a possibility.
Iran’s past actions, like the Khobar Towers bombing and rocket attacks on US forces in Iraq, show both its capability and intent to retaliate. Its allies, including Yemen’s Houthis, have already threatened US naval forces.
Regional fallout and US response
With over 40,000 American troops stationed across the region, in Bahrain, Qatar, Iraq and elsewhere, Washington is reinforcing its positions. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has confirmed the deployment of additional assets, and non-essential diplomatic staff have been evacuated.
Trump, while portraying the US operation as restrained, has made it clear that more force will follow if Iran escalates. “There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran,” he warned.
Still, many in Tehran believe the real tragedy is already unfolding. Iran’s UN envoy accused Israel of manipulating US policy, saying Netanyahu had succeeded in dragging the United States into “yet another costly and baseless war.”