The smoke has not cleared over yet, but the verdict is already in, echoing across the shattered remnants of something far more fragile than concrete: the myth of the “rules-based international order.” The 12-Day War between Israel and Iran was not just a regional conflagration; it was the death knell for a system supposedly guarded by the United States, now exposed as a tool wielded selectively, broken brazenly by its very architects.
What happened in those terrifying days was not merely an exchange of fire but a seismic shift in the foundations of global security, thrusting us towards a future where the nuclear threshold, once cautiously contained, would now frantically be beckoned by nations watching the hypocrisy unfold.
The myth of the ‘rules-based international order’ lies shattered in the rubble of Tehran and Tel Aviv.
In recent months, the biggest security threat in the Middle East has come from military actions by Israel’s far-right government and its belief that it can dominate opponents through force, dismissing diplomatic talks and peaceful solutions. A fragile diplomatic window flickered briefly in the Middle East between the United States and the Islamic Republic of Iran, mediated by Oman. Iran, a country battered by economic sanctions and regional setbacks, was more than willing to sign a nuclear deal with the Trump Administration.
In 2018, President Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal originally signed by the Obama Administration. This marked a pivotal shift in U.S.-Iran relations. Trump, self-proclaimed best dealmaker, had stated that replace the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with a tougher agreement. The negotiations were still going on when Israel, on 13th June, launched airstrikes against Iran, citing to eliminate the threat of nuclear enrichment, which Israel claimed that Iran was just days away from building a nuclear bomb.
Israel’s unilateral assault on June 13, however, with the endorsement of the U.S., was not merely a military operation aimed at neutralizing nuclear facilities, but it was a calculated maneuver to reshape the Middle East’s strategic dynamics. But both Israel and the U.S. ultimately failed to accomplish that objective. Iran’s retaliatory missile barrages and Israel’s intense aerial bombardment have left both nations battered.
However, fortunately, the ceasefire between Israel and Iran has been secured through backchannel diplomacy, but this confrontation is far from resolved. It was just the beginning chapter between the two adversaries, potentially setting the stage for future conflicts. Though there are no winners, the clash has challenged the longstanding perceptions of Israel’s military dominance and shown the unwavering resolve of the Iranian people. Tehran persisted in launching missiles deep into Israel. It was America’s direct military involvement that shifted the tactical scales.
Airstrikes authorized by President Trump delayed, but did not dismantle, Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.
The U.S., once a guarantor of restraint, joined Israel’s campaign on June 21 (June 22, according to Iranian time), deploying B-2 stealth bombers equipped with bunker-penetrating ordnance to “neutralize” Iran’s nuclear sites. An initial U.S. intelligence report suggests that airstrikes authorized by President Donald Trump on Iran’s nuclear facilities delayed Tehran’s program by several months but did not dismantle it, countering claims made by Trump and his senior advisors regarding the complete neutralization of Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
The Defense Intelligence Agency’s report relies on the Pentagon’s preliminary assessment of the bomb damage analysis from strikes on nuclear installations at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan using earth-penetrating munitions delivered by B-2 bombers and submarine-launched Tomahawk missiles. It evaluates that the strikes did not eliminate the core infrastructure of Iran’s nuclear program and likely deferred it by only a few months, rather than years.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports that it is unaware of the whereabouts of Iran’s officially declared stockpile of 400kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU), enriched to 60% purity. If Iran possesses undisclosed enrichment centrifuges, it might be capable of producing weapons-grade fissile material (typically 90%) in a relatively short timeframe. That would suffice for ten nuclear warheads. This confrontation, stemming from Israeli aggression and American complicity, has fractured decades of nonproliferation norms, steering the world toward a future where nuclear weapons become the ultimate guarantor of security.
The diplomatic fallout is already unfolding in Tehran. On Monday, Iran’s parliamentary national security committee approved a bill outlining to halt Tehran’s collaboration with the United Nations’ nuclear monitoring agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as long as Iran’s nuclear facilities are vulnerable to military strikes. Committee representative Ebrahim Rezaei allegedly informed the semi-official Tasnim news agency that the legislation would move to a halt in the installation of surveillance cameras, inspections, and the submission of reports to the IAEA.
Iran may now adopt a trajectory similar to North Korea to achieve the ultimate deterrent.
The 12-day war would notably change Iran’s security perspective. Tehran has repeatedly claimed that its nuclear program aims for peaceful energy, a stance backed by Russia, China, and the IAEA, which found no evidence of weaponization. Nevertheless, the assaults on nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, along with the loss of crucial nuclear scientists and commanders, probably would compel Tehran’s leaders to a clear realization: without a nuclear arsenal, they remain significantly vulnerable to existential threats.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s statement on June 22, stating that all options will be available to protect sovereignty, showcases a potential shift. Iran’s nuclear limitations were linked to the JCPOA, which provided sanctions relief in exchange for compliance Trump’s departure from the agreement in 2018, which followed intensifying pressure on Iran through severe sanctions and the killing of Iran’s key military figure, General Qassem Soleimani in 2018, led Tehran to develop possible mistrust toward Washington.
Israel’s recent attacks along with America’s direct engagement, leading to the deaths of more than 610 individuals (as reported by Al Jazeera), have further deepened this declining mistrust. Leading analysts think that Iran may now adopt a trajectory similar to North Korea, facing harsh sanctions and intense pressure to achieve the ultimate deterrent by obtaining nuclear arms.
The bitter irony of the 12-Day War lies in its aftermath: The war imposed on Iran may not have dismantled its nuclear program, but instead undermined the very foundation of global nonproliferation efforts. The clear lesson that Tehran and other countries might now grasp is harsh: nations lacking nuclear arms are vulnerable to foreign aggression; those who possess them set an ultimate deterrent.
The war imposed on Iran may not have dismantled its nuclear program, but instead undermined global nonproliferation efforts.
This belief is perilous but would become increasingly justified, potentially triggering a chain reaction worldwide. Iran, having endured considerable attacks on its own territory, might now pursue the development of nuclear weapons for their survival in the volatile region. And they will not be alone.
Nations such as Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia, which currently do not possess nuclear weapons but are located in conflict-prone areas, may reconsider their security doctrines. This change signifies the decline of a worldwide system where power was maintained through agreements and alliances. A darker paradigm is arising where nuclear weapons serve as the ultimate guarantee of security. What was once unimaginable is now turning into a reality.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
