ON 22 June 2025, the United States carried out a major airstrike on three of Iran’s key nuclear facilities, Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan in an operation codenamed Operation Midnight Hammer.
The assault marked the most significant US military engagement in the Middle East since the Iraq War and signaled a sharp escalation in the ongoing tensions between Washington and Tehran. According to the Pentagon, the operation involved stealth B2 Spirit bombers and Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from submarines. The primary objective, as stated by US officials, was to degrade Iran’s nuclear capabilities and send a strong message of deterrence.
The Fordow and Natanz facilities, known for housing Iran’s most advanced uranium enrichment systems, were severely damaged. Initial satellite images confirmed large-scale destruction of above-ground structures and deep craters at key points of impact. The Iranian Atomic Energy Agency reported that while the attacks caused infrastructural damage, there were no radiation leaks or major loss of life, only eleven individuals were reported injured. Tehran immediately labelled the attack as an act of aggression, with Iranian officials vowing retaliation and suspending all ongoing diplomatic engagements, including nuclear negotiations that were underway in Oman.
The US justified its actions by citing Iran’s continued enrichment beyond permitted thresholds and what it called “intelligence-backed evidence” of preparations for weaponization. President Donald Trump declared the mission a success, while US military leadership adopted a more cautious tone, stating that the long-term impact on Iran’s nuclear progress remains to be seen. Meanwhile, Israel, which had initiated strikes on Iranian-linked sites earlier in the month, welcomed US involvement, seeing it as a decisive move in what it views as a collective security effort against a nuclear-armed Iran.
The international response to the strike was mixed. The United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres called the action a dangerous escalation and urged immediate diplomatic efforts to prevent further conflict. European leaders expressed deep concern over the attack, emphasizing that diplomacy, not force, should remain the core approach to resolving nuclear disputes. While allies like the United Kingdom extended conditional support, countries including Russia, China, Pakistan and Turkiye condemned the move as a violation of international norms and a threat to regional stability.
For Pakistan, this development presents significant strategic and security implications. As a neighbouring country with deep cultural, religious and economic ties to Iran, Pakistan faces the challenge of maintaining neutrality while navigating pressures from both the United States and Gulf allies. Pakistan has long advocated for diplomatic solutions in the Middle East and is now likely to come under renewed scrutiny regarding its position on the Iran-US conflict. In the short term, Pakistan could experience increased tensions along its western border. The potential for refugee movement, the resurgence of sectarian proxies and cross-border smuggling could destabilize regions such as Balochistan. Domestically, the attack may reignite sectarian discourse, complicating internal security and law enforcement efforts. Pakistan’s leadership will need to exercise caution to prevent any spillover effects while continuing counter-terrorism operations and managing its own internal challenges.
Economically, the prospect of broader regional conflict threatens to disrupt energy markets. A spike in global oil prices would be particularly damaging for Pakistan’s fragile economy, which is already burdened by inflation and an ongoing fiscal adjustment program under IMF oversight. Disruption in maritime trade routes, especially the Strait of Hormuz, could also hamper imports and push up transportation costs, putting further pressure on Pakistan’s trade deficit. In the diplomatic arena, Pakistan has an opportunity to position itself as a mediator or facilitator of dialogue, particularly given its working relationships with Tehran, Riyadh, Washington and Beijing. A carefully calibrated approach, emphasizing de-escalation and mutual respect for sovereignty, could enhance Pakistan’s standing as a peace-seeking nation. Foreign Minister-level outreach to both Iran and the US, alongside multilateral forums such as the OIC and SCO, could provide a platform for Pakistan to support dialogue and discourage further military engagement.
Security experts have also raised concerns over the cyber dimension of the conflict. Iran is expected to respond not only with potential missile strikes but also through cyber operations targeting US and allied infrastructure. Pakistan’s cyber defence capacity makes it vulnerable to being inadvertently caught in any broader regional digital conflict, particularly if servers, communication systems or critical infrastructure are used as transit points or are mistakenly targeted.
Politically, the situation could test Pakistan’s civil-military balance, especially if there are calls to take a clearer stance. Historically, Pakistan’s approach has been one of strategic ambiguity, but with mounting regional instability, pressure may grow to adopt a more explicit policy, either through public declarations or backchannel commitments. The US strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure is a reminder of how quickly tensions in one part of the world can affect political and economic dynamics far beyond the immediate conflict zone. For Pakistan, the priorities must remain clear: safeguard national security, protect economic interests and reinforce its long-held belief in multilateralism and peaceful conflict resolution.
War, no matter how technologically precise, carries unpredictable consequences. The cost is not always measured in lives lost, but in futures disrupted, economies shaken and diplomacy set back. As the situation evolves, the international community, including Pakistan, must push for an immediate return to dialogue. The road to peace does not begin with missiles, it begins at the table.
—The writer is PhD in Political Science, and visiting faculty at QAU Islamabad.
(zafarkhansafdar@yahoo.com)
