A fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran, brokered by former US President Donald Trump, appeared to be holding on Wednesday after 12 days of intense conflict that brought the long-standing shadow war into the open. Despite the cessation of direct hostilities, both nations were quick to declare victory, painting starkly different pictures of the outcome.
The truce took effect following a period of rapidly escalating tensions ignited by recent US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, conducted at Israel’s request. Iran responded by firing missiles at a US airbase in Qatar. Fears of a wider regional war briefly spiked before Trump announced the ceasefire via social media.
Fragile Truce Holds After Initial Violations
The ceasefire agreement was reportedly conditional on both sides adhering to its terms. Shortly after the truce was set to begin, reports emerged of violations. Israel confirmed destroying an Iranian radar installation, claiming retaliation for two Iranian ballistic missiles intercepted over Israeli airspace. While Iran officially denied firing these specific missiles, the brief exchange prompted a sharp rebuke from Trump, who publicly criticized Israel for the action before the truce was reinstated after he spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Since then, no major missile launches have been reported, though the Israeli military did intercept two suspected Iranian drones overnight before they could enter Israeli territory.
Conflicting Claims of Victory
Both Jerusalem and Tehran presented the outcome as a significant win.
Israel’s Perspective: Prime Minister Netanyahu declared a “historic victory,” asserting that the 12-day campaign had successfully eliminated the “threat of nuclear annihilation” from Iran and neutralized thousands of Iranian ballistic missiles. Israeli military officials echoed this, claiming their strikes had set back Iran’s nuclear program “by years.” Netanyahu lauded the determination of Israeli forces and notably thanked Trump for his support, particularly the direct operational involvement of the US in strikes initiated by Israel. Israel’s focus, according to its military chief, is now expected to shift back towards its campaign against Hamas in Gaza.
Iran’s Perspective: Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian countered, stating that America and Israel had “failed” in their primary objectives, which he listed as destroying facilities, dismantling nuclear expertise, and inciting social unrest. While acknowledging the loss of Iranian scientists and military members as a “grave blow,” he hailed Iran’s “heroic resistance.” The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) described their pre-ceasefire missile strikes against Israel as delivering a “historic and unforgettable lesson.” Iran’s Foreign Minister defended the strike on the US airbase in Qatar as legitimate self-defense.
The Nuclear Program: Damage Assessment Debate
A key point of contention is the true impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear program. While Netanyahu and Trump claimed devastating success, a preliminary US intelligence assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) offered a starkly different view. This report, based on initial battle damage assessment, suggested the strikes did not destroy key Iranian nuclear facilities like Natanz and Fordow, and likely only set back Iran’s program by a few months. The assessment indicated that core infrastructure, centrifuges, and enriched uranium stockpiles remained largely intact and could be restarted relatively quickly. It also raised the possibility that a significant portion of Iran’s highly enriched uranium may have been moved to other secret sites before the strikes. The White House disputed this report, calling it “flat-out wrong.”
However, some external experts provided varying perspectives. A former UN nuclear inspector estimated the strikes might have set back Iran’s ability to convert existing highly enriched uranium to weapons grade by “a good year or two,” particularly impacting the centrifuge program at deep sites. The director of the IAEA noted that only on-site inspections could fully assess damage to underground facilities, expecting “very significant damage” to sensitive components like centrifuges.
Adding complexity, the whereabouts of a previously identified 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium held by Iran remain unclear. Iran’s atomic energy organization claimed they had planned for recovery to prevent production interruption, while Iran’s parliament is reportedly considering a bill to fully suspend cooperation with the IAEA if passed, further complicating oversight.
Wider Impacts and International Reactions
The conflict resulted in significant casualties, with Iran’s health ministry reporting hundreds of deaths and thousands injured. In Israel, emergency services reported dozens killed by missile strikes. The fighting also caused widespread disruption, leading to the evacuation of over 400 Americans from Israel, independent travel by thousands more, and global flight cancellations and reroutes due to airspace closures.
Economically, the ceasefire brought some relief, with oil prices falling and stock markets gaining.
Internationally, the truce was welcomed by many nations, including Turkey, Russia, and Germany, easing fears of a broader regional conflict. However, concerns about Iran’s nuclear ambitions persist. France, along with its European partners (Germany and the UK), warned they are prepared to use “snapback” leverage to reimpose UN sanctions on Iran if a satisfactory agreement on its nuclear program isn’t reached by summer, referencing the 2015 deal’s framework. They stressed that negotiations remain the only path to prevent Iran from developing a military nuclear program.
In the US, the strikes generated domestic political fallout, including the controversial cancellation and later rescheduling of classified congressional briefings on Iran and an overwhelmingly rejected attempt to introduce an article of impeachment against Trump over the strikes.
Uncertain Path Forward
While the immediate fighting has stopped, the core tensions remain unresolved. The future path for Iran’s nuclear program hangs in the balance, potentially involving renewed UN inspections and attempts at a new diplomatic agreement, or a continuation of heightened tensions and the risk of future conflict. Israel has historically opposed nuclear deals with Iran, and Iran’s willingness to compromise is uncertain following the US withdrawal from the previous agreement and the recent strikes.
Other ongoing concerns highlighted by US officials include Iran’s continued provision of weapons to proxies and Russia, and growing ties between Iran, Russia, China, and North Korea. Amidst this geopolitical backdrop, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) also reported arresting 11 Iranian nationals over the weekend citing national security concerns and prior criminal convictions, including some with alleged ties to Hezbollah or former military roles, underscoring the multi-faceted nature of the tensions.
The current state is a fragile truce, not lasting peace, underscoring the deep complexities and potential for renewed escalation if fundamental disagreements are not addressed.
