logo
Operation Rising Lion: Why Did Israel Hit Iran's Nuke Sites And Which Are The Areas It Targeted?

Operation Rising Lion: Why Did Israel Hit Iran's Nuke Sites And Which Are The Areas It Targeted?

News1813-06-2025
Last Updated:
According to Israeli officials, this marks the beginning of a sustained campaign intended to roll back what they describe as a mounting threat from Tehran.
Israel carried out a large-scale military operation, christened Operation Lion, against Iran early on Friday, targeting critical nuclear and military infrastructure. The strikes were aimed at dismantling Iran's ability to develop nuclear weapons, disrupt its missile capabilities, and neutralise top figures in its defence leadership. FOLLOW LIVE UPDATES HERE
According to Israeli officials, this marks the beginning of a sustained campaign intended to roll back what they describe as a mounting threat from Tehran. Multiple explosions were reported across Iranian cities, with damage confirmed at several strategic sites, including nuclear facilities and military headquarters.
Why Iran Was Hit: Inside Israel's 'Pre-emptive Strike'
Israel launched sweeping airstrikes on Iran early Friday, in what it described as a pre-emptive military operation targeting nuclear facilities, ballistic missile sites, and top military commanders. The assault, part of Operation Rising Lion, marked the start of a prolonged campaign aimed at neutralising what Israel views as an 'existential threat" from Tehran.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it a 'decisive moment" in the country's history, declaring that the strikes would continue 'for as many days as it takes" to remove the danger.
The Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) stated that the decision to launch the attack stemmed from fresh intelligence indicating that Iran's nuclear weapons programme had reached the 'point of no return."
In an official statement, the IDF labelled the assault a 'pre-emptive strike," prompted by fears that Iran — an openly hostile regime with missiles capable of striking anywhere in Israel — was on the brink of weaponisation. IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir said the situation had crossed critical thresholds, and that Israel could no longer afford to wait.
Iran's uranium enrichment has been accelerating, according to the UN's nuclear watchdog, adding further urgency to Israeli concerns. Netanyahu, in a prerecorded address released during the strikes, claimed Iran now possesses enough enriched uranium to build nine nuclear weapons. He also warned that Tehran was taking unprecedented steps toward assembling a nuclear bomb.
However, a US official cited by Reuters indicated there had been no shift in Washington's intelligence assessment, which still holds that Iran has not restarted its nuclear weapons programme since it was shut down in 2003. Despite this, Israel's leadership felt compelled to act decisively to prevent what it described as a fast-approaching threat to its national survival.
Where Israel Struck
Israeli strikes reportedly hit dozens of locations across Iran, including key nuclear and military sites. Among the most significant targets was the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in central Iran, where explosions were reported by Iranian media and witnesses. Israel also struck the headquarters of Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards in Tehran, killing its top commander, Hossein Salami. At least two nuclear scientists, Fereydoun Abbasi and Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, were also reportedly killed in strikes on Tehran.
The offensive extended beyond air raids. According to Axios, citing Israeli officials, Mossad also led covert sabotage missions inside Iran, targeting missile sites and air defence systems.
(With inputs from Reuters)
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Best of Both Sides: Rivalry with China need not mean conflict
Best of Both Sides: Rivalry with China need not mean conflict

Indian Express

timean hour ago

  • Indian Express

Best of Both Sides: Rivalry with China need not mean conflict

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi's visit to India this week comes against the backdrop of volatile geopolitical headwinds: The US tariff squeeze on India over oil purchases from Russia, but a temporary tariff reprieve for China. Wang also called on Prime Minister Narendra Modi, after which the latter announced that he will meet President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit, adding that 'stable, predictable and constructive (New Delhi-Beijing) ties' will help 'global peace and prosperity'. The US has long pursued Britain's age-old grand strategy of preserving 'balance of power', with just one objective: Maintaining global preeminence. To this end, it has struck down, by forming a coalition, any rising power that became unmanageable. During World War II, the US allied with the USSR and the Chinese Kuomintang (KMT) nationalists. In the closing years of the war, while exploiting Soviet military predominance in Eastern Europe, it prevailed upon the Europeans to enter into the Bretton Woods Agreement (July 1944). As World War II ended, the US turned on its former ally, the USSR, and started to rebuild relationships with its former enemies, Japan and Germany, which it had firebombed and nuked into rubble. After the People's Republic of China was established (1949), the US, worried about the emergence of a powerful USSR-China communist bloc, sided with the KMT (which fled to Taiwan) and supported Taiwan's recognition as the 'real China' at the UN. It also trained Tibetan fighters against China. But its inability to break the Soviet Union finally led it to align with China through the 1972 Pakistan-led rapprochement, before which it ensured China replaced Taiwan (ROC) at the UN. The cases of Iran and Afghanistan, too, underline the risks of allying with the US. India could have avoided turning its ties with the US into a loud, personalised affair. History tells us that such personalisation has never ended well, as leaders not only get replaced, but are always drawn back to primary strategic issues. The priority of both the Joe Biden and Donald Trump administrations has been to manage Russia and China. The Russian economy is heavily dependent on energy exports, and its economic growth is contingent on high energy prices. From 2014, the US had tried, unsuccessfully, to push down oil prices to starve the Russian economy. Now, Trump wants to end the Russo-Ukrainian war, and as part of this endeavour, he demands that India stop purchasing Russian oil. India's refusal to do so has miffed him, prompting tariffs. On the other hand, the US wants to keep China's economic might, technological capabilities and geopolitical influence in check. But given the US's dependence on rare earths, certain supply chains, trade ties, and treasury holdings, there are limits to the risks Washington will expose itself to. If the US can arrive at a strategic understanding with China, it can de-emphasise its relationship with India. Further, the US's hope that India would emerge as an alternative economic-industrial destination and supply chain source vis-à-vis China didn't pan out. Can India, then, turn towards China? The reality is that, barring isolated incidents (1967 Nathu La and Cho La clashes; 1987 Sumdorong Chu and the 2017 Doklam stand-offs; 2020 Galwan skirmish), the Line of Actual Control (the line since the 1962 war) has been quiet. The Himalayas, stretching for about 2,400 km, are about 500 km wide in Kashmir and 200 km in Arunachal Pradesh. The Trans-Himalayas, the Great Himalayas and the Lesser Himalayas together constitute a very formidable obstacle and influence military operations, particularly logistics and land movement. While there's potential for skirmishes, limited land-grabs, and aerial and missile attacks, neither India nor China can conduct a full-scale, all-theatre war across the Himalayas, occupy large chunks of territory, and then sustain large forces over extended periods in occupied lands. Since the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979, China has studiously avoided war. It has focused on building its economy and infrastructure. War is no longer a lucrative venture. China gains nothing by going to war with a near-peer competitor like India. China stands to lose economically, politically and militarily even if it 'wins' a war. A war with India will also upset China's focus on 'great power' status vis-à-vis the US. The Communist Party is well aware that its legitimacy is linked to its ability to deliver continued prosperity to China's citizens. The UPA I and II governments invested a lot of political capital in convincing China to de-hyphenate India from Pakistan in its foreign policy. Even PM Modi had cultivated good relations with China. It, therefore, does make sense for India to have a rapprochement with China and pursue a mutually beneficial economic relationship. This will also allow India to build its economic strength, and by corollary, military strength. While India and China are geopolitical rivals, that rivalry need not descend into bitter conflict. If the two can manage their differences, the outcome can be stability, gradual normalisation and prosperity. The writer, a retired Army officer, was principal director in the National Security Council Secretariat

'On Acceptable Terms...': Netanyahu Orders To Resume Negotiations For Gaza Ceasefire
'On Acceptable Terms...': Netanyahu Orders To Resume Negotiations For Gaza Ceasefire

News18

timean hour ago

  • News18

'On Acceptable Terms...': Netanyahu Orders To Resume Negotiations For Gaza Ceasefire

Last Updated: Netanyahu ordered negotiations for hostage release and war end in Gaza, stressing Israel will only accept terms favorable to it and aims to decisively defeat Hamas. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered to resume negotiations to end war in Gaza. He has instructed to release all remaining hostages and end the war on terms 'acceptable to Israel". In a video message recorded on Thursday, Netanyahu also added that Israel military still intends to advance plans to take control of Gaza City. The statement comes ahead of a high-level security meeting between Netanyahu, defense chiefs and cabinet ministers focused on approving the operational plans to take Gaza City and 'decisively defeat Hamas." 'We are at the decisive stage," he said, highligting that 'defeating Hamas and securing the release of all hostages go hand in hand." As per the Israeli officials, 50 hostages remain in Gaza, at least 20 of whom are thought to be alive. view comments Location : Israel First Published: August 22, 2025, 07:14 IST Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Loading comments...

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store