How Iran Could Retaliate Against US. Three Possible Options
New U.S. forces have been deployed to the Middle East as the escalating conflict between Iran and Israel raises the prospect of Tehran retaliating against Washington, which one expert told Newsweek said could include Americans being taken hostage.
Khosro Sayeh Isfahani, a senior research analyst at the National Union for Democracy in Iran, told Newsweek that direct U.S. involvement in the hostilities could prompt Tehran to unleash its "Axis of Resistance" militias and Iranian intelligence sleeper cells globally.
The USS Nimitz carrier strike group is heading to the region from the South China Sea the Navy Times reported, citing a U.S. official who said the previously planned move had been expedited due to growing tensions.
The U.S. said Israel was acting unilaterally with last week's surprise attack on Iran's military and nuclear program which prompted Iran to launch more than 370 missiles and hundreds of drones killing at least 24 people in Israel, according to The Associated Press.
Hamidreza Azizi, visiting fellow at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, told Newsweek that Tehran is taking "increasingly seriously" the chances of direct U.S. involvement, after which "all bets would be off."
President Donald Trump has said he wants a "real end" to the conflict, but Iran views his calls for ending the war as a potential deception tactic, heightening alarm over the chances of military intervention, Azizi said.
Newsweek takes a look at three possible scenarios of direct U.S. involvement.
Israel has said it has full aerial superiority over Tehran and had destroyed more than 120 surface-to-surface missile launchers in central Iran, a third of its total arsenal.
This Israeli dominance over Iranian airspace and continued strikes on missile launchpads and launchers have stopped Iran from responding with the intensity it wanted to, Azizi said. But Tehran is also making the strategic calculation to conserve enough of its missile arsenal in case of direct U.S. involvement so it is ready for an expanded war.
The U.S. operates military sites across at least 19 locations in the Middle East, of which eight are permanent bases located across Bahrain, Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, hosting between 40,000 and 50,000 personnel.
So far, Tehran seems to have made a deliberate effort to refrain from attacking U.S. forces or bases, said Azizi, with limited drone strikes on some bases in Iraq which are "more of a warning than an actual engagement."
But the U.S. entering the conflict directly would be seen not just as a threat to the Iranian regime, but to the Iranian state, due to the potential for massive damage to critical infrastructure.
"We could then expect a range of retaliatory actions, from attacks on U.S. bases across the region to broader efforts to disrupt oil production and transportation, including-but not limited to-the Strait of Hormuz," said Azizi.
The Strait links the Persian Gulf to the Indian Ocean and beyond, as well as the vital shipping route through the Suez Canal to the Mediterranean and Europe
"Other forms of disruptive operations could also be initiated, as this would be perceived as an existential fight for the system," he added.
Esmail Kosari, the head of Iran's parliamentary committee on defense and national security, said closing the Strait of Hormuz between Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman through which around one fifth of the world's oil transits, is under serious consideration, according to Iranian state media.
The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) reported on Monday that there was increasing electronic interference within the Gulf and the Strait which impacted vessels' positional reporting through automated systems (AIS).
Jakob Larsen, chief safety and security officer for Baltic and International Maritime Council (BIMCO), a shipping association headquartered in Denmark, told Newsweek the conflict has caused concerns in the shipowning community.
U.S. authorities had reported that as of Monday, there were no indications of a threat from Iran toward commercial ships other than vessels with links to Israel. But if pressure on Iran continues to mount and the U.S. became more directly involved, Iran might expand its threats toward ships that did not have ties to Israel, Larsen said Tuesday.
"Iranian forces are highly skilled in asymmetric warfare and have prepared for decades for a scenario involving attacks against shipping through the Straits of Hormuz and adjacent waters," he said.
"Iran can start attacking shipping with almost no notice and certainly faster than the time it takes to sail a ship through the Straits of Hormuz," Larsen added.
Aurélien Colson, academic co-director of the ESSEC Institute for Geopolitics & Business, told Newsweek a critical link is the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
This is a gateway to the Red Sea and Suez-between Djibouti in Africa and Yemen and only around 15 miles wide at its narrowest point-where Iran-controlled Houthis could redouble their missile attacks against commercial maritime traffic, with substantial consequences on supply chains.
Isfahani said so far Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had avoided directly mentioning the U.S. because he is still hoping "to dupe Washington with false diplomacy."
But he told Newsweek that if push comes to shove, the Iranian regime will unleash a multi-pronged attack which would include launching missile and drone strikes against U.S. targets in the region.
Tehran will also unleash its "Axis of Resistance" militias in the region, as well as its Ministry of Intelligence and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps sleeper cells "to conduct terror attacks and take Americans hostage."
"Elements of the Axis might engage in drone and missile strikes against U.S. bases in the region as well," he added.
Lara Tandy, associate director at geopolitical and cyber risk consultancy S-RM, told Newsweek hostilities could end the U.S.-Houthi ceasefire agreed in May and Iran could leverage its network of Houthis in the region to attack ships and vessels crossing the Red Sea and Bab-el-Mandeb Strait.
Based on recent behavior, Iran could also target U.S. bases, forces, and embassies across the Middle East, which would be something Trump may interpret as a proxy for direct confrontation, Tandy added.
Related Articles
Israel Plans to Contain Nuclear Fallout From Any Strike on Iran's FordowAs Israel Eyes Regime Change, Iran's Opposition Is Divisive and DividedWatch: Israeli Airstrike Hits Iran State TV Live on AirFact Check: Did Iran Try to Assassinate Donald Trump?
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Trump calls for Iran's ‘unconditional surrender' and threatens its supreme leader
Trump's increasingly martial tone -- a sharp reversal from his announced confidence two weeks ago that a nuclear deal with Iran was easily within reach -- came only hours after he cut short his attendance at the Group of 7 summit of industrialized nations in Alberta, Canada, saying he needed to return to Washington to deal with the situation in the Middle East. Advertisement His immediate decision is whether to deploy America's largest conventional weapon -- the 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator -- to attack Fordo, Iran's deepest nuclear enrichment site. While Trump suggested that the United States had control of Iran's skies, the only visible combatant has been Israel, which has been using U.S.-made fighter jets. Israeli officials have said that they have been able to destroy much of Iran's air defenses. Advertisement In one of his messages Tuesday, Trump threatened Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, saying 'we know exactly where' he is. But he added that 'we are not going to take him out (kill!), at least for now.' He added, 'Our patience is growing thin.' Killing foreign leaders violates executive orders signed by a series of presidents dating to Gerald Ford. The operative one states: 'No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.' In his own social media post, Vice President JD Vance also hinted that the United States could step up its engagement. Vance said that Iran has no need for nuclear fuel enriched above the level needed for commercial power. Trump, he wrote, 'has shown remarkable restraint,' but 'may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment.' 'That decision ultimately belongs to the president,' Vance wrote. The vice president acknowledged the sentiments of some in the Republican Party who have called for staying out of conflicts in the Middle East, writing 'of course, people are right to be worried about foreign entanglement after the last 25 years of idiotic foreign policy,' a period of time that encompasses Trump's first term and the Bush, Obama and Biden administrations. But, he added, 'I believe the president has earned some trust on this issue.' It remains to be seen whether Trump will decide that the United States should join Israel's efforts, with American offensive capability. But the decision to launch a full-on attack on Iran's facilities would easily be in the gray area between the president's powers as commander in chief and the Constitution's mandate that only Congress can declare war. Advertisement Officially, the United States has said nothing about joining offensive operations with Israel. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said only that U.S. forces were maintaining a 'defensive posture.' It was also unclear whether Trump, who has talked repeatedly about seeking a diplomatic solution, now believes the time for negotiation is over. One senior official indicated Tuesday that there may be a short round of 'coercive diplomacy,' in which Iran is given a brief period of time to agree to the terms that Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, presented two weeks ago. That called for a gradual end to all enrichment on Iranian soil, a condition the Iranians said publicly they would reject. But on his flight back to Washington from Canada early Tuesday morning, Trump told reporters on Air Force One that he was not in the mood to continue talks with Iran, which were scheduled for last Sunday before Israel began mounting its attacks. Trump said that he was seeking a result that was 'better than a cease-fire' between Israel and Iran. Asked what would qualify, he said 'an end, a real end, not a cease-fire, a real end.' It was also unclear what Trump meant when he demanded Iran's 'unconditional surrender.' The United States has not declared war on Iran, and it has said it is not pursuing regime change there, though in Trump's first term many of his aides talked openly of trying to speed the collapse of its government. Iran has sent indications it is still willing to negotiate, but only if Israel's attacks on Tehran, the capital, and nuclear and missile sites cease. Advertisement The Israelis have shown no interest in letting up. And many Iran analysts believe Iranian leadership, shocked by the killing of many top military leaders and scientists, would likely not reverse its insistence on retaining enrichment capability, even if the alternative is continued assaults on its spread-out nuclear facilities. Their time may be running out. By deploying the refueling KC-135 and KC-46 aircraft to air bases in Italy, Spain, Germany and Greece, U.S. officials said that the Air Force was building an 'air bridge' in Europe should installations in the Middle East come under Iranian attack. Deploying the aircraft closer to the Middle East also provides the Pentagon more options if it needs to defend bases in the region, officials said. 'Protecting U.S. forces is our top priority and these deployments are intended to enhance our defensive positions in the region,' Hegseth said on social platform X on Monday. But the moves also put in place an elaborate refueling network for B-2 bombers, should Trump order them to fly the nearly 7,000 miles from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri to attack the Fordo site. In addition to the refueling tankers, the Pentagon is deploying F-16, F-22 and F-35 fighters to the Middle East. Fordo is Iran's most heavily fortified enrichment center, built deep inside a mountain to protect it from an attack. Only the U.S. military has the 30,000-pound bomb capable of even reaching it. Its size -- 20 feet long and 30,000 pounds -- means that only the American B-2 stealth bomber can carry it. On Capitol Hill, the president's public flirtation with joining Israel's bombing campaign has reawakened a long-dormant debate about clawing back congressional power to declare war. Advertisement In the House, a Democrat and a Republican teamed up on Tuesday to introduce a resolution that would require congressional approval before U.S. troops could engage in offensive attacks against Iran. The measure by Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., underscored a view held by many in Congress that Trump should not be able to decide on his own whether the United States wades deeper into the conflict. Thirteen additional Democrats signed on to the resolution, but no Republicans were so far supporting the effort. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., on Monday introduced a similar resolution. Both efforts face long odds, given Republican reluctance to challenge Trump's power. But with some lawmakers in both parties openly resisting further U.S. involvement, they are likely to prompt a vibrant debate. The measures enjoy a special status that will compel Congress to vote on them one way or the other in the coming days. Still, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has, so far, been successful in deflecting efforts to force Republican members to take any vote that would require them to challenge Trump's authority, and he could seek a procedural solution that would allow him to circumvent a vote on a war declaration. In the Senate, defense hawks cheered Trump's bellicose posture. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., reiterated his stance that he supported U.S. involvement in the conflict against Iran. 'I want us to go all in to help Israel destroy their nuclear programs,' he said Tuesday, adding that he had spoken to Trump on Monday evening about his views. Advertisement When asked what role Congress should have in authorizing offensive strikes in Iran, Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, deferred to Trump. 'I have total faith and confidence in the president of the United States,' he said in an interview Tuesday. This article originally appeared in
an hour ago
Firms led by US military veterans deliver aid in Africa and Gaza, alarming humanitarian groups
ON A PLANE OVER UPPER NILE STATE, South Sudan -- Swooping low over the banks of a Nile River tributary, an aid flight run by retired American military officers released a stream of food-stuffed sacks over a town emptied by fighting in South Sudan, a country wracked by conflict. Last week's air drop was the latest in a controversial development — private contracting firms led by former U.S. intelligence officers and military veterans delivering aid to some of the world's deadliest conflict zones, in operations organized with governments that are combatants in the conflicts. The moves are roiling the global aid community, which warns of a more militarized, politicized and profit-seeking trend that could allow governments or combatants to use life-saving aid to control hungry civilian populations and advance war aims. In South Sudan and Gaza, two for-profit U.S. companies led by American national security veterans are delivering aid in operations backed by the South Sudanese and Israeli governments. The American contractors say they're putting their security, logistics and intelligence skills to work in relief operations. Fogbow, the U.S. company that carried out last week's air drops over South Sudan, says it aims to be a 'humanitarian' force. 'We've worked for careers, collectively, in conflict zones. And we know how to essentially make very difficult situations work,' said Fogbow President Michael Mulroy, a retired CIA officer and former senior defense official in the first Trump administration, speaking on the airport tarmac in Juba, South Sudan's capital. But the U.N. and many leading non-profit groups say U.S. contracting firms are stepping into aid distribution with little transparency or humanitarian experience, and, crucially, without commitment to humanitarian principles of neutrality and operational independence in war zones. 'What we've learned over the years of successes and failures is there's a difference between a logistics operation and a security operation, and a humanitarian operation,' said Scott Paul, a director at Oxfam America. ''Truck and chuck' doesn't help people,' Paul said. 'It puts people at risk.' Fogbow took journalists up in a cargo plane to watch their team drop 16 tons of beans, corn and salt for South Sudan's Upper Nile state town of Nasir. Residents fled homes there after fighting erupted in March between the government and opposition groups. Mulroy acknowledged the controversy over Fogbow's aid drops, which he said were paid for by the South Sudanese government. But, he maintained: 'We don't want to replace any entity' in aid work. Fogbow was in the spotlight last year for its proposal to use barges to bring aid to Gaza, where Israeli restrictions were blocking overland deliveries. The United States focused instead on a U.S. military effort to land aid via a temporary pier. Since then, Fogbow has carried out aid drops in Sudan and South Sudan, east African nations where wars have created some of the world's gravest humanitarian crises. Fogbow says ex-humanitarian officials are also involved, including former U.N. World Food Program head David Beasley, who is a senior adviser. Operating in Gaza, meanwhile, Safe Reach Solutions, led by a former CIA officer and other retired U.S. security officers, has partnered with the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a U.S.-backed nonprofit that Israel says is the linchpin of a new aid system to wrest control from the U.N., which Israel says has been infiltrated by Hamas, and other humanitarian groups. Starting in late May, the American-led operation in Gaza has distributed food at fixed sites in southern Gaza, in line with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's stated plan to use aid to concentrate the territory's more than 2 million people in the south, freeing Israel to fight Hamas elsewhere. Aid workers fear it's a step toward another of Netanyahu's public goals, removing Palestinians from Gaza in 'voluntary' migrations. Since then, several hundred Palestinians have been killed and hundreds more wounded in near daily shootings as they tried to reach aid sites, according to Gaza's Health Ministry. Witnesses say Israeli troops regularly fire heavy barrages toward the crowds in an attempt to control them. The Israeli military has denied firing on civilians. It says it fired warning shots in several instances, and fired directly at a few 'suspects' who ignored warnings and approached its forces. It's unclear who is funding the new operation in Gaza. No donor has come forward, and the U.S. says it's not funding it. In response to criticism over its Gaza aid deliveries, Safe Reach Solutions said it has former aid workers on its team with 'decades of experience in the world's most complex environments' who bring "expertise to the table, along with logisticians and other experts.' Last week's air drop over South Sudan went without incident, despite fighting nearby. A white cross marked the drop zone. Only a few people could be seen. Fogbow contractors said there were more newly returned townspeople on previous drops. Fogbow acknowledges glitches in mastering aid drops, including one last year in Sudan's South Kordofan region that ended up with too-thinly-wrapped grain sacks split open on the ground. After gaining independence from Sudan in 2011, South Sudan has struggled to emerge from a civil war that killed nearly 400,000 people. Rights groups say its government is one of the world's most corrupt, and until now has invested little in quelling the dire humanitarian crisis. South Sudan said it engaged Fogbow for air drops partly because of the Trump administration's deep cuts in U.S. Agency for International Development funding. Humanitarian Minister Albino Akol Atak said the drops will expand to help people in need throughout the country. But two South Sudanese groups question the government's motives. 'We don't want to see a humanitarian space being abused by military actors ... under the cover of a food drop," said Edmund Yakani, head of the Community Empowerment for Progress Organization, a local civil society group. Asked about suspicions the aid drops were helping South Sudan's military aims, Fogbow's Mulroy said the group has worked with the U.N. World Food Program to make sure 'this aid is going to civilians.' 'If it wasn't going to civilians, we would hope that we would get that feedback, and we would cease and desist,' Mulroy said. In a statement, WFP country director Mary-Ellen McGroarty said: 'WFP is not involved in the planning, targeting or distribution of food air-dropped' by Fogbow on behalf of South Sudan's government, citing humanitarian principles. Longtime humanitarian leaders and analysts are troubled by what they see as a teaming up of warring governments and for-profit contractors in aid distribution. When one side in a conflict decides where and how aid is handed out, and who gets it, 'it will always result in some communities getting preferential treatment,' said Jan Egeland, executive director of the Norwegian Refugee Council. Sometimes, that set-up will advance strategic aims, as with Netanyahu's plans to move Gaza's civilians south, Egeland said. The involvement of soldiers and security workers, he added, can make it too 'intimidating' for some in need to even try to get aid. Until now, Western donors always understood those risks, Egeland said. But pointing to the Trump administration's backing of the new aid system in Gaza, he asked: 'Why does the U.S. ... want to support what they have resisted with every other war zone for two generations?' Mark Millar, who has advised the U.N. and Britain on humanitarian matters in South Sudan and elsewhere, said involving private military contractors risks undermining the distinction between humanitarian assistance and armed conflict. Private military contractors 'have even less sympathy for a humanitarian perspective that complicates their business-driven model," he said. 'And once let loose, they seem to be even less accountable.' Knickmeyer reported from Washington. Mednick reported from Tel Aviv, Israel. ___
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
The Latest: Israel strikes Tehran for a sixth day as Iranian casualties rise
Explosions were heard in Tehran early Wednesday as intense Israeli airstrikes again targeted Iran's capital in a conflict that a human rights group said had killed at least 585 people across Iran and wounded 1,326 others. Iran has not been publishing regular death tolls during the conflict and has minimized casualties in the past. Its last update, issued Monday, put the death toll at 224 people killed and 1,277 others wounded. Iran has retaliated against Israel's airstrike campaign by launching some 400 missiles and hundreds of drones at Israel. So far, 24 people have been killed in Israel. Here's the latest: ___ Egypt's FM holds calls with Iranian counterpart and U.S. envoy Egypt's top diplomat has held calls with both Iran's foreign minister and U.S. Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff, Cairo and Tehran say. Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty held the calls Tuesday with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Witkoff. Abdelatty reportedly stressed 'the necessity of working toward de-escalation in the region and resorting to diplomatic and political solutions that contribute to containing the escalating situation and averting the risk of a widespread conflagration in the Middle East.' Abdelatty 'underscored the imperative of achieving an immediate ceasefire and returning to the path of negotiations as the only means to reach a sustainable agreement regarding the Iranian nuclear program,' his office said in a statement. He 'further emphasized the absence of military solutions to the crises currently facing the region.' A social media account associated with Araghchi confirmed the calls took place. U.S. officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Human rights group says 585 people killed in Iran Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 585 people and wounded 1,326 others, a human rights group said Wednesday. The Washington-based group Human Rights Activists offered the figures, which covers the entirety of Iran. It said of those dead, it identified 239 civilians and 126 security force personnel being killed. Human Rights Activists, which also provided detailed casualty figures during the 2022 protests over the death of Mahsa Amini , crosschecks local reports in the Islamic Republic against a network of sources it has developed in the country. Iran has not been offering regular death tolls during the conflict and has minimized casualties in the past. Its last update, issued Monday, put the death toll at 224 people being killed and 1,277 others being wounded. Israeli strikes hit Tehran Intense Israeli airstrikes targeted Iran's capital early Wednesday after it issued a warning about a new area it could target. One major explosion could be heard around 5 a.m. local time Wednesday morning, with other explosions booming earlier in the predawn darkness. Authorities in Iran offered no acknowledgement of the attacks, which has become increasingly common as the Israeli airstrike campaign has intensified since they began on Friday. The Israelis had warned they could strike a neighborhood south of Mehrabad International Airport. That area includes residential neighborhoods, military installations, pharmaceutical companies and industrial firms. Satellite photos show U.S. Navy ships out of Bahrain dock Satellite images analyzed Wednesday by The Associated Press appear to show that there are no longer any vessels anchored off the headquarters of the U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet in Bahrain as the strikes between Israel and Iran continue. The images, taken Tuesday, show the main dock there without any ships against it. Dispersing ships is a common safety technique employed by navies around the world in times of trouble. Meanwhile Tuesday, local media reported that Bahrain conducted a test of its air raid sirens. Iran has threatened to target U.S. military installations in the region, though there's not been any attack so far since the Israeli campaign against Iran began on Friday. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
