
‘Surprises will continue': World braces for Iran's response to US strikes
The US and Israel carried out major military strikes on Iran's nuclear site at Fordow, with significant visible damage, leading to heightened tensions and threats of retaliation from Tehran.
Iran approved a step to close the Strait of Hormuz, crucial for global oil supply, potentially escalating the conflict and affecting the global economy.
Israel and Iran exchanged heavy missile fire, with casualties on both sides, while the US emphasized its strikes were aimed at neutralizing Iran's nuclear program, not regime change.
The world braced on Sunday for Iran's response after the US attacked key Iranian nuclear sites, joining Israel in the biggest Western military action against the Islamic Republic since its 1979 revolution.
With the damage visible from space after 30 000-pound US bunker-buster bombs crashed into the mountain above Iran's Fordow nuclear site, Tehran vowed to defend itself at all costs.
It fired another volley of missiles at Israel that wounded scores of people and flattened buildings in Tel Aviv.
The US State Department ordered employees' family members to leave Lebanon and advised citizens elsewhere in the region to keep a low profile or restrict travel.
An advisory from the US Department of Homeland Security warned of a "heightened threat environment in the United States."
Law enforcement in major US cities stepped up patrols and deployed additional resources to religious, cultural and diplomatic sites.
Tehran has so far not followed through on its threats of retaliation against the United States - either by targeting US bases or trying to choke off global oil supplies - but that may not hold.
Speaking in Istanbul, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said his country would consider all possible responses. There would be no return to diplomacy until it had retaliated, he said.
"The US showed they have no respect for international law. They only understand the language of threat and force," he said.
Ali Shamkhani, an adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said on X that the initiative was "now with the side that plays smart, avoids blind strikes. Surprises will continue!"
US President Donald Trump, in a televised address, called the strikes "a spectacular military success" and boasted that Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities had been "completely and totally obliterated."
But his own officials gave more nuanced assessments and - with the exception of satellite photographs appearing to show craters on the mountain above Iran's subterranean plant at Fordow - there has been no public accounting of the damage.
READ | US strikes against Iran not aimed at regime change, Pentagon chief says
The UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, said no increases in off-site radiation levels had been reported after the US strikes.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi told CNN that it was not yet possible to assess the damage done underground. A senior Iranian source told Reuters that most of the highly enriched uranium at Fordow had been moved elsewhere before the attack. Reuters could not immediately corroborate the claim.
Trump immediately called on Iran to forgo any retaliation, saying the government "must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier," he said.
US Vice President JD Vance said Washington was not at war with Iran but with its nuclear programme, adding this had been pushed back by a very long time due to the US intervention.
In a step towards what is widely seen as Iran's most effective threat to hurt the West, its parliament approved a move to close the Strait of Hormuz. Nearly a quarter of global oil shipments pass through the narrow waters that Iran shares with Oman and the United Arab Emirates.
Iran's Press TV said closing the strait would require approval from the Supreme National Security Council, a body led by an appointee of Khamenei.
Attempting to choke off Gulf oil by closing the strait could send global oil prices skyrocketing, derail the world economy and invite almost certain conflict with the US Navy's massive Fifth Fleet, based in the Gulf and tasked with keeping the strait open.
Security experts have long warned a weakened Iran could also find other unconventional ways to strike back, such as bombings or cyberattacks.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in an interview on "Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo," warned Iran against retaliation for the US strikes, saying such action would be "the worst mistake they've ever made."
Rubio separately told CBS's "Face the Nation" talk show that the US has "other targets we can hit, but we achieved our objective."
"There are no planned military operations right now against Iran," he later added, "unless they mess around."
The UN Security Council was due to meet later on Sunday, diplomats said, at the request of Iran, which urged the 15-member body "to address this blatant and unlawful act of (US) aggression, to condemn it in the strongest possible terms."
Diverging war aims
Israeli officials, who began the hostilities with a surprise attack on Iran on 13 June, have increasingly spoken of their ambition to topple the hardline Shi'ite Muslim clerical establishment that has ruled Iran since 1979.
US officials, many of whom witnessed Republican President George W. Bush's popularity collapse following his disastrous intervention in Iraq in 2003, have stressed that they were not working to overthrow Iran's government.
"This mission was not and has not been about regime change," Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth told reporters at the Pentagon.
He added:
Senator Lindsey Graham, a staunch Trump ally, said on NBC's "Meet the Press with Kristen Welker" program that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had told him his country would no longer endure being under missile attack.
"They're not going to live under threat from Iran anymore," Graham said.
"Israel's made a decision. This regime is going to change in one of two ways: they're going to change their behavior, which I doubt, the regime itself, or the people are going to replace the regime.'
Iranians contacted by Reuters described their fear at the prospect of an enlarged war involving the United States.
"Our future is dark. We have nowhere to go - it's like living in a horror movie," Bita, 36, a teacher from the central city of Kashan, said before the phone line was cut.
Much of Tehran, a capital city of 10 million people, has emptied out, with residents fleeing to the countryside to escape Israeli bombardment.
Iranian authorities say more than 400 people have been killed since Israel's attacks began, mostly civilians. Israel's bombardment has scythed through much of Iran's military leadership with strikes targeted at bases and residential buildings where senior figures slept.
Iran has been launching missiles back at Israel, killing at least 24 people over the past nine days, the first time its projectiles have penetrated Israel's defences in large numbers.
The elite Revolutionary Guards said they had fired 40 missiles at Israel in the latest volley overnight.
Air raid sirens sounded across most of Israel on Sunday, sending millions of people to safe rooms.
In Tel Aviv, Aviad Chernovsky, 40, emerged from a bomb shelter to find his house had been destroyed in a direct hit. "It's not easy to live now in Israel (right now), but we are very strong. We know that we will win,' he said.
Trump had veered between offering to end the war with diplomacy or to join it, at one point musing publicly about killing Iran's supreme leader. His decision ultimately to join the fight is the biggest foreign policy gamble of his career.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
32 minutes ago
- New York Times
Iranian Officials Try to Project Sense of Normalcy, Though Nothing Is Normal
Iran was reeling from American military attacks on its three main nuclear sites early Sunday, with four officials describing the mood in the government as one of defeat and national humiliation, amid divisions about how to respond. Publicly, Iranian officials have tried to project a sense of normalcy even though nothing is normal. They have tried to downplay the damage to the nuclear facilities at Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, even though satellite images show the mountainous site of Fordo's underground facilities punctured with huge holes. But Hamid Hosseini, a member of the country's Chamber of Commerce energy committee, said in a phone interview from Tehran that Iran did not have the upper hand — militarily and technologically — and that it was time to stand down. 'We need to make national interests the priority,' he said. 'We are not supposed to be at war forever.' On Sunday, Iran's president, Masoud Pezeshkian, made public rounds in the capital, stopping at an anti-American demonstration in downtown Tehran and visiting patients of victims of the attacks at a hospital. A heart surgeon and former health minister, he praised the medical staff members for their service during the war. In a post on social media, Mr. Pezeshkian wrote: 'We will walk this path together. We will protect Iran and show the world that our great people are undefeatable.' Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
An Iranian attack on US military bases could draw the UK into the conflict
When I got to Chequers on Sunday morning the prime minister had clearly been up for most of the night and hitting the phones all morning with calls to fellow leaders in Europe and the Middle East as he and others scrambled to try to contain a very dangerous situation. His primary message on Sunday was to try to reassure the public that the UK government was working to stabilise the region as best it could and press for a return to diplomacy. But what struck me in our short interview was not what he did say but what he didn't - what he couldn't - say about the US strikes. It was clear from his swerve on the question of whether the UK supported the strikes that the prime minister neither wanted to endorse US strikes nor overtly criticise President Trump. Instead, his was a form of words - repeated later in a joint statement of the E3 (the UK, Germany and France) to acknowledge the US strikes and reiterate where they can agree: the need to prevent Iran having a nuclear weapon. He also didn't want to engage in the very obvious observation that President Trump simply isn't listening to Sir Keir Starmer or other allies, who had been very publicly pressing for de-escalation all week, from the G7 summit in Canada to this weekend as European countries convened talks in Geneva with Iran. It was only five days ago that the prime minister told me he didn't think a US attack was imminent when I asked him what was going on following President Trump's abrupt decision to quit the G7 early and convene his security council at the White House. When I asked him if he felt foolish or frustrated that Trump had done that and didn't seem to be listening, he told me it was a "fast moving situation" with a "huge amount of discussions in the days since the G7" and said he was intensely pressing his consistent position of de-escalation. What else really could he say? He has calculated that criticising Trump goes against UK interests and has no other option but to press for a diplomatic solution and work with other leaders to achieve that aim. Before these strikes, Tehran was clear it would not enter negotiations until Israel stopped firing missiles into Iran - something Israel is still saying on Sunday evening it is not prepared to do. The US has been briefing that one of the reasons it took action was because it did not think the Iranians were taking the talks convened by the Europeans in Geneva seriously enough. It is hard now to see how these strikes will not serve but to deepen the conflict in the Middle East and the mood in government is bleak. Iran will probably conclude that continuing to strike only Israel in light of the US attacks - the first airstrikes ever by the US on Iran - is a response that will make the regime seem weak. Read more: But escalation could draw the UK into a wider conflict it does not want. If Iran struck US assets, it could trigger article five of NATO (an attack on one is an attack on all) and draw the UK into military action. If Iran chose to attack the US via proxies, then UK bases and assets could be under threat. The prime minister was at pains to stress on Sunday that the UK had not been involved in these strikes. Meanwhile, the UK-controlled airbase on Diego Garcia was not used to launch the US attacks, with B-2 bombers deployed from Guam instead. There was no request to use the Diego Garcia base, the president moving unilaterally, underlining his disinterest in what the UK has to say. The world is waiting nervously to see how Iran might respond, as the PM moves more military assets to the region while simultaneously hitting the phones. The prime minister may be deeply opposed to this war, but stopping it is not in his gift.


Fox News
37 minutes ago
- Fox News
Inside the Situation Room, where Trump and his national security team monitored 'spectacular' success on Iran
President Donald Trump reported to the West Wing's Situation Room multiple times across the past week as the conflict in Iran came to a rolling boil and the president ordered strikes on a trio of Iranian nuclear facilities Saturday evening in a surprise operation that took the world by surprise. Trump returned to the Situation Room Saturday as the U.S. targeted Iran's nuclear facilities, and was flanked by key officials such as Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine and CIA Director John Ratcliffe, according to photos from inside the room published late Saturday. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was also in the Situation Room, the White House confirmed to Fox Digital. Trump publicly announced the strikes in a Truth Social post Saturday evening, which came as a surprise to the world, as there were no media leaks or speculation such an attack was imminent. He then delivered an address to the nation on the strikes, lauding them as a "spectacular military success." "A short time ago, the U.S. military carried out massive precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime: Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan," he said. "Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise. Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity, and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror. Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success." "For 40 years, Iran has been saying, 'Death to America. Death to Israel.' They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs with roadside bombs," Trump continued. "That was their specialty. We lost over a thousand people, and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate in particular." Ahead of the strikes, Trump floated Wednesday he might order an attack on Iran as negotiations on its nuclear program fell apart and the president made repeated trips to the Situation Room. "Yes, I may do it. I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do. I can tell you this that Iran's got a lot of trouble, and they want to negotiate," Trump told reporters Wednesday on the U.S. potentially striking Iran as it continues trading deadly strikes with Israel. "And I said, why didn't you negotiate with me before all this death and destruction? Why didn't you go? I said to people, why didn't you negotiate with me two weeks ago? You could have done fine. You would have had a country. It's very sad to watch this." Fox News Digital spoke to previous presidential administration officials — Fox News host and former Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany, who served under the first Trump administration, and former National Security Advisor under the first Trump administration John Bolton, who also served as ambassador to the U.N. under President George W. Bush's administration. They both conveyed the serious and historic tone the room and its meetings typically hold. The Situation Room is a high-tech 5,000-square-foot complex in the West Wing of the White House that includes multiple conference rooms. President John F. Kennedy commissioned the complex in 1961 following the failed Bay of Pigs invasion to overthrow the Castro regime in Cuba that same year, according to the National Archives. The complex was built in order to provide future presidents a dedicated area for crisis management, and was revamped in 2006 and renovated again in 2023. "I often would sit there and think about the Osama bin Laden raid," McEnany told Fox News Digital in a phone interview Thursday morning. "This is where we saw our heroic Special Forces take out Osama bin Laden during the Obama administration. And I think we're at another point where similar decisions are being made, and even bigger decisions that may change the course of history are happening right now in that room." Trump had spent hours in the Situation Room since June 16, including on Thursday morning, when he received an intelligence briefing with national security advisers, which followed a Situation Room meeting on Wednesday afternoon, another meeting on Tuesday afternoon with national security advisers and a Monday evening meeting upon his abrupt return from the G7 summit in Canada this week. Top national security officials, including Hegseth, Gabbard, Vance, Rubio and Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff, were among officials who joined Trump in the meetings as the administration weighs the spiraling conflict. Bolton explained to Fox Digital in a Thursday morning phone interview that two types of top-level meetings are held in the Situation Room. The first is known as a "principals meeting," he said, which includes Cabinet secretaries, such as the secretary of state and secretary of defense, and is chaired by the national security advisor — a role currently filled by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. "The principals committee usually meets to try and get everything sorted out so that they know what decisions the president is going to be confronted with," Bolton said. "They try and make sure all the information is pulled together so we can make an informed decision, set out the options they see, what the pros and cons are, and then have (the president) briefed." The second type of Situation Room meeting at the top level are official National Security Council meetings, which the president chairs. "He chairs a full NSC meeting, and people review the information, update the situation, and the president can go back and forth with the advisors about asking questions, probing about the analysis, asking for more detail on something, kind of picking and choosing among the options, or suggesting new options," said Bolton, who served as Trump's national security advisor between April 2018 and September 2019. "And out of that could well come decisions," he added. McEnany served as the first Trump administration's top spokeswoman at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, when the Coronavirus Task Force operated out of the Situation Room as COVID-19 swept across the nation. "A lot of critical decisions were made during the pandemic," she said. "It's a humbling encounter. Every time you go in, you leave your phone at the door. You go in, I think it's like 5,000 square feet, you're sitting there, there's clocks up from every country around the world, the different time zones. And you're just sitting there as critical decisions are made. And, in my case, it was regarding the pandemic, and there's back and forth, there's deliberation, and these decisions are made with the president there, obviously." She continued that during the pandemic, the task force would spend hours in the Situation Room on a daily basis as the team fielded an onslaught of updates from across the country. Trump frequently received the top lines from the meetings and joined the Situation Room during key decisions amid the spread of the virus. "When he was in there, absolutely, there's a deference," she said, referring to how the tone of the room would change upon Trump's arrival. "Yet, you had key officials who spoke up, who were not afraid to give their point of view to him. But I think there's a recognition he's the commander in chief." Press secretaries typically do not attend high-profile National Security Council meetings in the Situation Room, but have security clearances and can call into the room if needed, and are given updates from senior officials. McEnany added that press secretaries wouldn't typically want to be in the room for high-stakes talks because "you don't want your head filled with these sensitive deliberations of classified information" when speaking with the media. Bolton explained that for an issue such as Iran, the Situation Room meetings were likely restrictive and included top national security officials, such as the secretary of defense, director of national intelligence and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "Sometimes it includes many more people, the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Commerce Secretary, things like that," he said. "But in with this kind of decision, it could be very restrictive, so maybe just – well, there is no national security advisor – but, Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, Director of National Intelligence, CIA Director, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, maybe the attorney general." Trump's first national security advisor under the second administration, Mike Waltz, was removed from the role and nominated as the next U.S. ambassador to the UN in May, with Rubio taking on the additional role. The White House has also slashed NSC staffing since Trump took office, including after Rubio took the helm. Ahead of the surprise strikes on Saturday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt held a press conference on Thursday — the first since Israel launched preemptive strikes on Iran June 12 — and said the next two weeks would be a critical time period as U.S. officials map out next steps. "I have a message directly from the president, and I quote: 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future. I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks.' That's a quote directly from the president," she said Thursday. Israel launched pre-emptive strikes on Iran June 12 after months of attempted and stalled nuclear negotiations and subsequent heightened concern that Iran was advancing its nuclear program. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared soon afterward that the strikes were necessary to "roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival." He added that if Israel had not acted, "Iran could produce a nuclear weapon in a very short time." Dubbed "Operation Rising Lion," the strikes targeted Iran's nuclear and missile infrastructure and killed a handful of senior Iranian military leaders. Trump had repeatedly urged Iran to make a deal on its nuclear program, but the country pulled out of ongoing talks with the U.S. scheduled for Sunday in Oman. "Iran should have signed the 'deal' I told them to sign," Trump posted to Truth Social Monday evening, when he abruptly left an ongoing G7 summit in Canada to better focus on the Israel–Iran conflict. "What a shame, and waste of human life. Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!" Trump said during his address to the nation on Saturday evening following the strikes that Iran's nuclear facilities had been "obliterated" and that the country has been backed into a corner and "must now make peace." "Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated," Trump said. "And Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not. future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier." Leavitt added during Thursday's briefing that Trump is the "peacemaker-in-chief," while noting that he is also not one to shy from flexing America's strength. "The president is always interested in a diplomatic solution to the problems in the global conflicts in this world. Again, he is a peacemaker in chief. He is the peace-through-strength president. And so, if there's a chance for diplomacy, the president's always going to grab it. But he's not afraid to use strength as well," she said. Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for additional comment on the high-level talks but did not immediately receive a reply.