Why Did Israel Target Tehran’s Nuclear and Military Infrastructure?

June 15, 2025— On June 13, 2025, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a massive preemptive assault on Iran’s nuclear and military infrastructure, targeting over 100 sites across Tehran, Natanz, Isfahan, and Shiraz. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) struck ballistic missile launchers, air defenses, nuclear facilities, and energy infrastructure, killing senior military commanders and nuclear scientists.

With explosions still echoing in Tehran on June 15, the operation—described by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a response to Iran’s “point of no return” in its nuclear ambitions—has ignited fears of a wider regional war. But why did Israel take such a drastic step, and what are the implications?

ALSO READ | How Will Iran’s Missile Barrages Challenge Israel’s Defense Strategy?

Strategic Motives: Halting a Nuclear Threat

Israel’s primary objective was to neutralize Iran’s nuclear program, which it claims was weeks away from producing enough fissile material for multiple nuclear weapons. The IDF cited intelligence suggesting Iran had amassed sufficient enriched uranium for up to 15 bombs, a claim echoed by Israeli officials but not independently verified by the U.S. or International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

The Natanz nuclear enrichment facility, which was a key target, suffered severe damage to its aboveground plant; IAEA chief Rafael Grossi reported that there was chemical and radiological contamination, although the underground centrifuges may still be intact. Strikes also hit Isfahan’s uranium conversion facility and research sites, aiming to disrupt Iran’s nuclear supply chain.

Netanyahu authorized the attack to “roll back” Iran’s capabilities, framing Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat and asserting it could delay weaponization by years. The operation also targeted military infrastructure, including missile launchers used in Iran’s retaliatory barrages that killed 13 in Israel, to curb Tehran’s ability to strike back. The killing of top Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders, including Hossein Salami and Mohammad Bagheri, suggests a “decapitation” strategy to weaken Iran’s military leadership.

ALSO READ | Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions Bombed—How Much Time Was Bought?

The “Point of No Return” Claim: Fact or Pretext?

Israel’s justification hinges on intelligence alleging Iran was nearing a nuclear breakthrough. An Israeli official claimed Tehran’s secret program could assemble 15 nuclear bombs “within days,” though no public evidence supports this timeline. The IAEA reported Iran violated non-proliferation obligations, but its assessments suggest Iran is still months, not days, from weaponization. Critics argue Israel exaggerated the threat to justify preemptive action, especially after Iran rejected U.S. nuclear deal terms demanding zero uranium enrichment.

The timing raises questions. Nuclear talks in Oman, scheduled for June 15, collapsed after Israel’s strikes, suggesting Netanyahu may have sought to sabotage diplomacy. Iran’s complacency—ignoring warnings of an imminent attack—allowed Israel to exploit vulnerabilities, striking unprepared air defenses and commanders. This aligns with Israel’s history of covert operations, like the Stuxnet virus and 2021 Natanz sabotage, but the scale of Operation Rising Lion marks a dramatic escalation.

Did you know?
In 1981, Israel’s Operation Opera destroyed Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor, delaying its nuclear program by years. This bold but controversial strike mirrors Israel’s current attacks on Iran’s nuclear sites, raising urgent questions about their long-term impact.

Risks of Regional Escalation

Israel’s actions carry immense risks. Iran’s retaliatory missile and drone attacks, killing 13 in Israel, signal Tehran’s resolve to respond fiercely. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei vowed “severe punishment,” while Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the strikes a “declaration of war.” Iran’s targeting of Israel’s military bases and civilian areas, coupled with threats to U.S. regional assets, could draw Washington into the conflict, despite President Trump’s claim of non-involvement.

The strikes on Iran’s energy infrastructure, including the South Pars gas field and Tehran’s Shahran oil depot, have spiked global oil prices by 9-12%, threatening economic stability. Iran’s accusation that the U.S. authorized the attacks—denied by Secretary of State Marco Rubio—further complicates diplomacy. Russia and China condemned Israel’s actions, while Saudi Arabia and the UK urged de-escalation, reflecting global alarm.

A prolonged conflict, projected to last “weeks, not days,” could destabilize the Middle East, especially after Israel’s recent victories over Iran’s proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran’s potential exit from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) or accelerated nuclear efforts could paradoxically hasten the bomb Israel sought to prevent.

What Lies Ahead?

The region is on the verge of collapse as Israel continues its strikes and Iran prepares for further retaliation. The IDF’s evacuation warnings to Iranian civilians near weapons factories signal more attacks, while Tehran’s internet outages and Starlink activation highlight the chaos within. The IAEA’s emergency meeting and canceled nuclear talks underscore the diplomatic void.

Israel’s gamble aims to cripple Iran’s nuclear and military power, but the cost—civilian deaths, economic turmoil, and potential for all-out war—demands scrutiny. Was the “point of no return” a genuine threat or a pretext for regime destabilization? The answer will shape the Middle East’s future.