Andy Park: Hello, welcome to The World Today. It’s Wednesday the 18th of June. I’m Andy Park coming to you from Gadigal Land in Sydney. Today the battle begins. Iran’s Supreme Leader has declared vowing a strong response and no mercy. And Viking treasure, a spectacular discovery of 30 graves full of pearls, coins and gold.

Lisa Bennett: It also shows us in many ways how we’re not so different. Even a thousand years later, you know, the same sort of interests are there, the same sort of hopes and dreams and failings are present in these stories about the Vikings.

Andy Park: Iran’s Supreme Leader has vowed no mercy and promised a strong response after the US demanded Iran surrender unconditionally. President Trump has warned Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that the US won’t kill him now, but says his country’s patience is wearing thin. Experts are warning the threats won’t work, arguing any US military moves to intervene would spread the dangerous conflict across the whole region. Stephanie Smail reports.

Stephanie Smail: The skies light up again as more Iranian missiles are intercepted over the Israeli city of Tel Aviv. The Israeli army has vowed to keep hitting back in the deadly fight to prevent Iran from building an atomic weapon. Desperate residents in Tehran are trying to flee. But this woman has told the ABC traffic is gridlocked for up to 200 kilometres to the north. She says she will try a different route next time, but if that doesn’t work, she doesn’t know what she’ll do. The United States is grappling with how to stop the conflict, the President Donald Trump calling for Iran’s unconditional surrender. He’s issued a warning to Iran on social media, saying we know exactly where the so-called Supreme Leader is hiding. We are not going to take him out, at least not for now. President Trump left the Group of Seven summit in Canada a day early to deal with the conflict between Israel and Iran. He’s told reporters a ceasefire isn’t enough, correcting the French President Emmanuel Macron’s comments that a ceasefire was on the cards, insisting he’s looking for better than a ceasefire. When asked to explain, he says the US wants to see a real end to the conflict that could involve Iran giving up entirely. Experts are warning if President Trump pursues his threats to engage the US military in Iran, it will be a huge undertaking. Kelsey Davenport is the Director of Non-Proliferation Policy at the Arms Control Association in the United States.

Kelsey Davenport: The US would need to use the largest conventional weapon in its arsenal, the massive ordnance penetrator, which is a very strong bunker buster. It’s so large it can only be delivered by US B-2 planes. And it would likely need to strike some of these hardened sites repeatedly in order to damage them.

Stephanie Smail: But Kelsey Davenport says military intervention risks broadening the conflict across the entire region and making US assets a target.

Kelsey Davenport: Any type of attack supported by the United States directly is only going to make Iran less likely to negotiate. Trump has been consistent in saying he wants a nuclear deal. If that remains the case, he should be pushing much harder for a ceasefire, pressing Israel to stop attacking Iran and laying out a plan for diplomacy going forward.

Stephanie Smail: She explains President Trump is facing major pressure at home not to intervene.

Kelsey Davenport: There will be bipartisan pushback in Congress, saying that he does not have an authorization to use military force in Iran. And I think a significant portion of his base will be arguing that the United States should not be getting entangled in another conflict in the Middle East.

Stephanie Smail: As the conflict continues, Israel is standing firm. Here’s Army spokesman Brigadier General Effie Defrin.

Effie Defrin: The Iranian regime has spent years getting closer to a nuclear weapon, they have spent billions building a ballistic missile programme. Our mission is clear – to remove the threat at its source.

Stephanie Smail: Since it began its campaign on Friday, Israeli strikes have killed at least 224 people in Iran and at least 24 people have been killed in Israel.

Andy Park: Stephanie Smail there. Well, how does all this end? Regime change in Iran, a disabling of their nuclear sector, the US forced to compromise on its demand or increasingly dragged into a domestically unpopular war? There are few signs this conflict will be over quickly, but some historical signs on how these actors may play out their parts. Bob Bowker is a former Australian ambassador to several Arab nations, and is an honorary professorial fellow at the Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies at the ANU. I spoke to him earlier. Bob, welcome to you. Thank you very much. You say that Donald Trump is perhaps underestimating the zeal of the Iranian regime to stay the course, especially in the face of a threat like surrender or else. I mean, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei tweeted that the battle begins, quote, referencing the Battle of Khaybar, which was a confrontation between Muslims and Jews in 628 AD. What does that tell you?

Bob Bowker: I doubt that Trump really appreciates the staying power of the Iranians, particularly when they’re facing an external threat. If Trump had any appreciation of the history, the society, the importance of Iranian identity, and the way in which that has been reflected in their resistance to external pressure, he would think very carefully about becoming involved in a project which involved a direct military confrontation.

Andy Park: What is the relevance of that reference to the Battle of Khaybar?

Bob Bowker: Well, that’s getting down and dirty. It’s really a reference to the long-term conflict between Jews and Muslims.

Andy Park: What about the Israeli aims of either pacifying the nuclear threat or perhaps forcing a regime change? Are these long-term goals or short-term goals for someone like Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu?

Bob Bowker: What worries me is that the Israelis are showing no sign at all of any strategic vision about how they might bring about a durable peace. I don’t think they have a clue what to do after the Iranian nuclear capacity is removed. Perhaps they don’t really believe that a peace is possible, but a future full of conflict also bodes very ill for Israel at both societal and strategic levels.

Andy Park: Is regime change realistic? Is that a realistic goal to strive for the Israelis?

Bob Bowker: No, it’s a fantasy. The consequences of trying to make it happen are likely to be more damaging or certainly less rewarding than leaving a regime in place under sanctions with the support of the international community. We can look at Iraq and look at Libya as evidence for that. If this regime does not fall, then it will have a very strong inclination to make this into a war of attrition. The consequences for Israel of engaging in a long-term conflict of that nature really are very difficult to predict and probably very bad.

Andy Park: What about for the US? Trump has made a name for himself of starting high in negotiations, perhaps folding or rationalising his demands. The US has started exceptionally high, surrender or else. What are the chances that the US must compromise on that or become entrenched in another Middle East war?

Bob Bowker: I doubt very much that Trump understands the way in which he has been played on this issue. On the one hand, you have the Iranians who think they are smart enough to outwit Trump. On the other hand, you have the Israelis who see Trump as an instrument toward their objectives. I doubt that Trump really understands the way in which he is being perceived and the role of the United States is being perceived by these two players. When eventually it becomes apparent that the United States has been used to pursue agendas which don’t really reflect US interests, perhaps Trump will back off. At the moment, I think there is far too much hubris, far too much focus on short-term military successes, the razzle-dazzle of tactics, and definitely not enough consideration being given to where all this might lead.

Andy Park: Bob Bowker is an honorary professorial fellow at the Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies at the ANU. I do appreciate your time. Thank you. Thank you, Andy. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has continued to meet with world leaders at the G7 and says he’s considering going to a summit of NATO members next week, which Donald Trump is expected to attend. Meanwhile, the government is working on plans to help get Australians out of the Middle East. More than 2,000 have already registered with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. And while that number is expected to grow, acting Prime Minister Richard Miles warns closed airspace around Iran and Israel could hamper repatriation efforts. Here’s Gavin Coote.

Gavin Coote: As Donald Trump calls for Iran’s surrender and hints the US could enter the conflict, Anthony Albanese has confirmed he’s received a briefing from Washington.

Anthony Albanese: Yes, we have been briefed and I don’t talk about briefings in media conferences.

Gavin Coote: As he prepared to depart the G7 in Canada, the PM said the summit had been productive, despite the cancellation of his planned meeting with President Trump. And in a sign of the rapidly evolving security challenges facing the world, Mr Albanese revealed Australia will pursue a new pact with European leaders.

Anthony Albanese: And I’m pleased to announce today that we will commence negotiations on a security and defence partnership with the European Union. We see this as an important framework for our current and future cooperation in areas like defence industry, cyber and counter-terrorism. And we will have our respective ministers progress that over coming weeks, but we hope to conclude those discussions pretty quickly.

Gavin Coote: But amid the uncertainty over Iran, Mr Albanese has ruled out Australia deploying defence assets to the Middle East, even as nations like Britain send aircraft to the region.

Anthony Albanese: What the discussions I’ve always had with our European friends always is, is they understand that our priority is where we are in the world. And so a no is the clear answer to that.

Gavin Coote: Members of the NATO Military Alliance will gather next week for a separate summit in the Netherlands, which it’s expected Donald Trump will join. The Prime Minister is now considering going as well, opening a potential new window for a rescheduled face-to-face meeting with the US President. The government’s focus is now on getting Australians out of the conflict zone. 2,000 Australians in the Middle East have now registered with the Department of Foreign Affairs. Acting Prime Minister Richard Marles.

Richard Marles: There are actually thousands of Australians in both Iran and Israel. So we are really preparing for numbers of that order and we’re expecting those numbers to rise.

Gavin Coote: Australians in Iran and Israel have been advised to shelter where they are for now. And the acting PM says the government is working hard on plans for assisted departures.

Richard Marles: The real problem right now, of course, is that airspace over both Iran and Israel is closed. And that is making matters difficult. But we are working on being able to move as soon as there is an opportunity to do so.

Gavin Coote: Iran shares land borders with seven countries and many foreign nationals there have fled into Azerbaijan in recent days. Australians with family in Iran are nervous about the escalating conflict. Bahar Chaichi, who migrated from Iran 13 years ago and is now living in the New South Wales city of Newcastle, has many loved ones still there.

Bahar Chaichi: Time to time the internet is cut off or even when it’s back, the reception is very poor. So yeah, it’s a significant problem with contacting our beloved ones in Iran. We’ve been witnessing some images, horrible images from the queues of the cars trying to get out of Tehran, which is almost impossible. Tehran has got a population of nine million. So it’s very, very difficult to move all that population with limited supply of the petrol.

Gavin Coote: The Australian government’s smart traveller website is advising those outside Israel and Iran not to travel there.

Andy Park: Gavin Coote reporting there. Meanwhile in Gaza, medics say at least 59 people were killed after Israeli tanks fired into a crowd waiting for food aid. Israel says it’s looking into the reports. It’s the latest incident in a string of near daily shootings taking place near aid distribution sites in Gaza. The UN once again criticising Israel’s aid distribution. Tanya Dendrinos reports.

Tanya Dendrinos: Chaos outside southern Gaza’s Nasser hospital. The injured brought in by any means possible, some in cars or on carts and others simply carried. This man recounts from inside the crowded hospital. All of a sudden they let us move forward and made everyone gather and then shells started falling. The people are dying. They are being torn apart to get food for their children, he says. Palestinian medics say at least 59 people were killed in Khan Younis after Israeli tanks fired into a crowd waiting for food aid. The Israeli military has acknowledged firing in the area, saying it’s reviewing the details of the incident and that it operates to minimise harm as much as possible while maintaining the safety of its troops. The UN has once again levelled criticism at Israel’s approach to aid distribution. Thanos Gargavanis is from the World Health Organisation.

Thanos Gargavanis: The recent food distribution initiatives by non-UN actors every time result in mass casualty incidents. This very moment that we’re talking, another food distribution has resulted in numerous fatalities and even more casualties ending up in Nasser, that it’s in limited operational capacity because of its position in the evacuation zone.

Tanya Dendrinos: Israel has been distributing much of the aid it’s now allowing into Gaza through a new US-Israeli backed group, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. It operates a number of distribution sites in areas guarded by Israeli forces. But humanitarian organisations have rejected the system, saying it’s inadequate and violates impartiality rules. Israel argues it’s needed to prevent Hamas fighters accessing aid. In a new report, the UN accuses Israel of committing the crime against humanity of extermination by killing civilians, sheltering in schools and religious sites in Gaza. Navi Pillay is the chair of the UN’s Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Navi Pillay: These attacks were part of a widespread and relentless assault against the Palestinian people in which Israeli forces have committed war crimes, including directing attacks against civilians and wilful killing and the crime against humanity of extermination.

Tanya Dendrinos: Israel alleges Hamas uses civilian infrastructure as a shield, which Hamas denies. William Schabas is a professor of international law at Middlesex University. He believes this report will be used to strengthen existing proceedings against Israel at the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.

William Schabas: There are a lot of developments that have already taken place since the proceedings by South Africa were filed at the end of 2023 and the hearing, which is likely to take place perhaps two years from now. But I have no doubt that this report and the other reports have probably already been filed. We don’t know this, but I would assume that South Africa is going to file this and that will obviously strengthen the case that it’s making.

Tanya Dendrinos: Israel has dismissed the proceedings as politically motivated and an attempt to persecute Israel.

Andy Park: Tanya Dendrinos there. On ABC Radio across Australia, streaming online and on the ABC Listen app, this is The World Today. Thanks for your company. An ordinary field in Denmark has revealed a spectacular archaeological site and a fascinating window into Viking culture. About 30 graves have been exhumed with coins, pearls and other riches which sat undisturbed for about a thousand years. Researchers are continuing to dig and expect the site may yet reveal more secrets, as Myles Houlbrook-Walk reports.

Myles Houlbrook-Walk: With each careful scrape of the ground, Danish archaeologists reveal more about pagan graves from a bygone era. The site near Aarhus in Denmark is believed to be part of what was the home of a noble family. Kasper Andersen is a historian specialising in the Viking Age.

Kasper Andersen: We have a large farm near Lisbjerg, which has been a political and economic power centre with connections to the royal power. And now we have the place where people who lived and stayed in the big farm were buried in pagan times.

Myles Houlbrook-Walk: The dig has produced a trove of discoveries, pearls, coins and other riches, along with human remains, including teeth and bones. Australian National University Associate Professor of European Archaeology Cate Friemann says discoveries like this are becoming more and more common as countries all over become more densely populated.

Cate Friemann: They’re common everywhere in the world. People have inhabited this planet for tens of thousands of years, hundreds of thousands in Africa, and pretty much anywhere you build something, people have lived before you. So you’re very likely to find archaeology.

Myles Houlbrook-Walk: How delicate are archaeological operations like this?

Cate Friemann: They’re pretty delicate because you’re working on funerary remains, with which you always take incredible respect and care because human remains are very special. It’s a real privilege to be able to work in these sorts of contexts. But also some of the finds they’re pulling up are pretty fragile. So they’ve been block lifting artefacts, so things that look too fragile to just be lifted out of the ground themselves. They cut the dirt around them, wrap them in plaster and then cut the plaster with all the dirt and all the artefacts inside out of the ground and excavate it, usually with very fine tools in a laboratory.

Myles Houlbrook-Walk: As these artefacts are examined, more will be known about precisely how old they are. Preliminary findings indicate they date from the time of King Harald Bluetooth, a powerful ruler in the 10th century. Associate Professor Lisa Bennett is from Flinders University.

Lisa Bennett: And so Harald Bluetooth is famous for ruling Denmark, introducing Christianity to Denmark and consolidating a bunch of lands. So being a very powerful king, in other words, had famous sons, famous wife, but is really known also for bringing Christianity to these pagan lands.

Myles Houlbrook-Walk: And though these discoveries date from a millennium ago, Lisa Bennett argues they are still relevant today.

Lisa Bennett: And we learn about what life was like for regular people in the medieval period. And it also shows us in many ways how we’re not so different, even a thousand years later, you know, the same sort of interests are there, the same sort of hopes and dreams and failings are present in these stories about the Vikings. And then also the joys of being alive at that time and this time. There are so many similarities I love going back to and seeing, you know, people are people no matter what time in history they lived.

Andy Park: Associate Professor Lisa Bennett there from Flinders University, ending that report from Myles Houlbrook-Walk. Now, what do the chords C, G, A minor and F have in common? Well, pick any pop song and you’ll likely find them in some combination from the Beatles to the Beach Boys, from Dua Lipa to Sabrina Carpenter. This was essentially the argument English singer, songwriter Ed Sheeran successfully made in the US Supreme Court, ending a decade-long copyright battle with the part owner of Marvin Gaye’s 1973 classic hit, Let’s Get It On. Kimberley Price has more.

Kimberley Price: Does this song sounds like this one? Oh, come on! That question has been at the centre of a 10-year legal battle. Now the US Supreme Court has ended any speculation, ruling Marvin Gaye’s classic, Let’s Get It On, wasn’t copied by Ed Sheeran’s 2014 hit song, Thinking Out Loud. It ends years of litigation between the recording artist and his fellow songwriter, Amy Wadge, and the entity known as Structure Asset Sales, which has a copyright interest in the Marvin Gaye track. After two copyright trials and an appeal, the Sheeran legal team was successful in arguing the two pop hits, recorded over 40 years apart, do share a four-chord pattern but are otherwise different. In 2023, Ed Sheeran spoke outside court after winning the first copyright trial.

Ed Sheeran: We spent the last eight years talking about two songs with dramatically different lyrics, melodies and four chords which are also different and used by songwriters every day all over the world. These chords are common building blocks which were used to create music long before Let’s Get It On was written and will be used to make music long after we are all gone.

Kimberley Price: The musicians’ lawyers argued in court that other popular songs use the same chord progression, Crocodile Rock by Elton John, Rod Stewart’s Have I Told You Lately, and the chords can also be heard in The Beatles’ I Feel Fine. I’m in love with her and I feel fine.

Alison Cole: I mean these progressions are pretty much standard building blocks in the pop genre.

Kimberley Price: Dr Alison Cole is a composer at the Sydney Conservatorium of Music. She says both Sheeran and Gaye’s songs share a G in the bass of the chords, which has been the focus of the copyright claims.

Alison Cole: Arguably they’re the same harmonic function and they are the same harmonically, but it’s the bass note of the chord that has the harmonic function. The other notes are of lesser relevance. So the G in the bass common to both songs is far more important than the other notes accompanying it.

Kimberley Price: However, the other elements of the songs are radically different.

Alison Cole: What happens within the chord regressions, things such as lyrics, particular melody lines, rhythm, all these elements around harmonic progressions cannot be owned.

Kimberley Price: The case could have had big implications for songwriters. Ed Sheeran’s collaborator Amy Wadge is speaking here to the BBC.

Amy Wadge: There was also this huge existential threat of what it actually meant for the world of songwriting and for songwriters in general. And I always felt the weight of that because people would tell me everybody is looking at this case. I just knew that had they been successful, it really would have caused a huge issue for creativity in general. So it was a big, big responsibility.

Kimberley Price: Ed Sheeran is currently on the European leg of his world tour, but Amy Wedge hopes the pair can celebrate soon.

Amy Wadge: But I am quite sure at some point we will be able to sit down and actually say thank goodness.

Andy Park: Ed Sheeran’s collaborator Amy Wadge ending that report by Kimberley Price. And that’s all from the World Today team. Thanks for your company. I’m Andy Park.

CNN —

It might be happening again.

A president is being driven – by events, fear of proliferating weapons of mass destruction and the need to back up his own words – toward a shock-and-awe entry into a Middle East conflict with no guaranteed way out.

Expectations are growing in Washington that Donald Trump will soon heed Israeli calls to try to strike a decisive blow against Iran’s nuclear program, using bunker-busting weapons that only the US can deliver.

The president’s rhetoric took a sharp turn following the apparent success of Israel’s early barrage that wiped out top military leaders and nuclear scientists and severely degraded Iran’s capacity to defend itself.

And CNN reported Tuesday that Trump was warming to the idea of using US military assets to strike Iranian nuclear sites and was souring on his previous unsuccessful attempt to settle the issue through talks with Iran.

A satellite image taken on June 14, 2025, shows no visible damage to Iran’s Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant. Maxar Technologies

As always with Trump, we must ask whether his tough talk is for real. Perhaps he is trying to bully Iran back to diplomacy and the “unconditional surrender” he demanded on social media.

This looks like a pipe dream.

“As long as President Trump is trying to capitalize on Israeli aggression against Iran, to get the Iranian leadership to surrender, it is just simply not going to work,” Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, told Becky Anderson on CNN International’s “Connect the World” Tuesday. “What they see at the end of this slippery slope is basically full capitulation and regime collapse.”

And since Israel’s preemptive attack on Iran seems partly motivated by the desire to derail US diplomacy, who’s to say a president who has recently been ignored by Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping could stop Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu?

But Trump may be on the brink of a huge gamble that would repudiate his own political principles.

His own scathing contempt for US presidents who pushed regime change played a huge role in the former reality star’s dive into politics in 2015. If he goes to war in Iran, Trump will be ignoring a loud sector of his MAGA movement. The “America First” president would become the kind of interventionist he despised.

Still, there is a loophole in Trump’s isolationism. He’s always insisted that Iran, given its threats to eradicate Israel and sworn enmity with the US, would never be allowed to get a nuclear weapon.

A trail of failed US interventions

In this photo released by the US Air Force on May 2, 2023, airmen look at a GBU-57, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, at Whiteman Air Base in Missouri. US Air Force/AP

Trump is deliberating whether to use 30,000-pound “Massive Ordnance Penetrator” guided bombs to destroy Iran’s nuclear plant at Fordow, which is entombed below several hundred feet of concrete in a mountain.

But something important is missing: any public talk by top officials about what might happen next.

This is an extraordinary omission given Washington’s 21st-century misadventures, when it started wars and spent the best part of 20 years trying to get out.

“Anyone who is cheerleading the United States into a war with Iran has very quickly forgotten the disasters of the Iraq war and the Afghanistan war,” Sen. Chris Murphy told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Tuesday. The Connecticut Democrat recalled those conflicts “became a quagmire that ultimately got thousands of Americans killed and created new insurgencies against US interests and against our allies in the region.”

Bombs fall on government buildings located in the heart of Baghdad along the Tigris River on March 20, 2003. Carolyn Cole/Los Angeles Times/Getty Images

The United States rolled into Iraq in 2003 and quickly toppled the tyrant Saddam Hussein. But it collapsed the Iraqi state and unleashed a vicious insurgency that ultimately ended in a US defeat. Fragile stability has only now returned to Iraq more than two decades later.

In Afghanistan, President George W. Bush’s post 9/11 invasion drove out Taliban leaders harboring Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda. But two decades of failed nation-building led to a humiliating US withdrawal in 2021 that shattered then-President Joe Biden’s claims to be a foreign affairs guru.

President Barack Obama had his own debacle. He was persuaded by European allies and some of his own aides to overthrow Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi to protect civilians in 2011. “We came, we saw, he died,” then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in an interview. US hubris over Libya faded long ago. But it remains dangerous and impoverished.

Trump knows all this.

The moment it became clear that he’d change the hawkish Republican Party forever occurred when he slammed primary rival Jeb Bush in a 2016 debate over his brother’s wars. “The war in Iraq was a big fat mistake” Trump said.

And he hasn’t forgotten. He reminded the world of it just last month in a major speech in Saudi Arabia.

“The so-called nation-builders wrecked far more nations than they built, and the interventionalists were intervening in complex societies that they did not even understand themselves,” Trump said. “They told you how to do it, but they had no idea how to do it themselves.”

Is Trump now going to become one of his own examples?

How Iran might respond

Iran is not Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan. History doesn’t have to repeat itself. Maybe the hawks are right this time that a devastating, contained US military strike can destroy Iran’s nuclear program and remove an existential threat to Israel and national security risk for the United States.

But Iran’s clerical regime would almost certainly have to respond, if only to protect its own authority. Depending on its remaining military capacity after the Israeli onslaught, it might attack US personnel and bases in the region. Trump would have to respond in a cycle of escalation with no clear endgame.

Oil tankers pass through the Strait of Hormuz, December 21, 2018. Hamad I Mohammed/Reuters

It’s easy to draw up nightmare scenarios. Iran might shut down the Strait of Hormuz to choke the flow of oil to trigger a global energy crisis. Or it might target oil fields of its regional rivals, such as Saudi Arabia. Only one nation could lead a response: the United States, as it got sucked deeper into a regional war. Then there’s the possibility of mass Iranian cyber-attacks that could bring war to the homeland.

Few Americans would mourn Iran’s regime if Israel’s push for regime change or encouragement for Iranians to revolt against Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei pays off.

But political forces likely to be unleashed by the fall of the Islamic revolution, or the regime’s crown jewel – its nuclear program – could cause immense upheaval.

Anarchy or worse could be the result if a nation of 90 million people – which includes ethnic and sectarian fault lines among Persians, Azeris, Kurds, Baloch, Turkmen, Turk and Arab tribes – is suddenly leaderless.

A failed-state meltdown could send millions of refugees into the Middle East and Europe when immigration is already straining societal cohesion and fomenting extremism. A sudden security vacuum could lead to civil wars, or a brutalist takeover from the military or elements of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya know how quickly terror havens can spring up. Unrest could spread throughout the region and threaten already unstable nations like Pakistan.

It’s also worth asking how the US and Israeli governments would secure stocks of nuclear material left exposed by raids on Iran’s atomic plants to prevent them falling into the hands of terrorists or rogue states.

As dire as these possibilities sound, they may be immaterial to Israel’s thinking. After all, Netanyahu says the prospect of an Iranian nuclear bomb could lead to the eradication of his country and the Jewish people.

But history, current and distant, challenges the idea a joint US and Israel effort would be short and conclusive. Israel still hasn’t eradicated Hamas despite many months of bombardments in Gaza that have inflicted a terrible toll on tens of thousands of Palestinian civilians. Iran is likely to be a bigger challenge. And US efforts to shape Iran – including a CIA-backed coup in 1953, support for the repressive Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi that led to the Islamic revolution, and Washington’s backing for Hussein in the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s – almost always made the situation worse.

The factors that may push Trump toward an attack

So why has Trump apparently shed his earlier reticence over foreign wars?

If he gives the go-ahead for a US attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, he could end up in a spot that any president might have reached. All his recent predecessors warned that Iran could never be allowed to get the bomb – although Trump may be blamed for failing with diplomacy to stop it happening on his watch.

But if Israel’s warnings that Tehran was racing toward a nuclear weapon were accurate, no US president could stand by and risk a second Holocaust – especially one who in his first term trashed a nuclear deal that Iran was respecting.

It probably not coincidental that Trump’s thinking evolved given the apparent success of early Israeli operations. He revealed on Tuesday that “we” now have “complete and total control of the skies over Iran.” A potential low-risk environment for US bombers might tempt a president who worships Gen. George Patton. He might sense a quick foreign policy win to make up for his failures to be the peacemaker he promised. And he’d love to crow that he – and not Bush, Obama or Biden – eradicated the threat from Iran.

Still, he’s a problematic war leader, having done nothing to prepare the country for a possible new escapade in a region stained by American blood and lost treasure. And Trump’s strategy of governing as a divisive strongman may deprive him of the bipartisan public trust all warrior presidents need to succeed.

Suddenly, a man who took great pride in never starting new wars has landed in a familiar place.

He’s a president debating whether to send Americans into a new Middle East conflict based on possibly questionable intelligence about weapons of mass destruction.

The fallen from the Iraq and Afghan wars lie in Section 60 of Arlington National Cemetery. The very least they are owed is an explanation of what happens next, if the first US bombs start dropping in Iran.

Explosions were heard in Tehran early Wednesday as intense Israeli airstrikes again targeted Iran’s capital in a conflict that a human rights group said had killed at least 585 people across Iran and wounded 1,326 others.

Iran has not been publishing regular death tolls during the conflict and has minimized casualties in the past. Its last update, issued Monday, put the death toll at 224 people killed and 1,277 others wounded.

Iran has retaliated against Israel’s airstrike campaign by launching some 400 missiles and hundreds of drones at Israel. So far, 24 people have been killed in Israel.

Here’s the latest:

Egypt’s top diplomat has held calls with both Iran’s foreign minister and U.S. Mideast envoy Steve Witkoff, Cairo and Tehran say.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty held the calls Tuesday with Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Witkoff.

Abdelatty reportedly stressed “the necessity of working toward de-escalation in the region and resorting to diplomatic and political solutions that contribute to containing the escalating situation and averting the risk of a widespread conflagration in the Middle East.”

Abdelatty “underscored the imperative of achieving an immediate ceasefire and returning to the path of negotiations as the only means to reach a sustainable agreement regarding the Iranian nuclear program,” his office said in a statement.

Israeli strikes on Iran have killed at least 585 people and wounded 1,326 others, a human rights group said Wednesday.

The Washington-based group Human Rights Activists offered the figures, which covers the entirety of Iran. It said of those dead, it identified 239 civilians and 126 security force personnel being killed.

Iran has not been offering regular death tolls during the conflict and has minimized casualties in the past. Its last update, issued Monday, put the death toll at 224 people being killed and 1,277 others being wounded.

Intense Israeli airstrikes targeted Iran’s capital early Wednesday after it issued a warning about a new area it could target.

One major explosion could be heard around 5 am local time Wednesday morning, with other explosions booming earlier in the predawn darkness.

Topline Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned any U.S. involvement in its conflict with Israel will have “serious irreparable consequences,” after President Donald Trump directly threatened him and demanded Iran’s “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER,” fueling speculation about U.S. military involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict. Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

Key Facts

According to a statement delivered via Iranian state media, the Supreme Leader said his country “stands firm against an imposed war, just as it will stand firm against an imposed peace,” adding that Iran will “not surrender to anyone in the face of imposition,” warning any U.S. involvement in the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict will undoubtedly lead to serious irreparable harm.” The Iranian leader also addressed president Trump’s comments on Tuesday calling for Iran’s “uncondional surrender,” saying those who know his country’s history “know that Iranians do not answer well to the language of threats.” Aerial attacks from both sides continued early on Wednesday as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office claimed Iran has launched more than 400 missiles and hundreds of drones since Friday. White House officials told multiple outlets Trump spoke with Netanyahu on Tuesday after a meeting with national security advisors. Unnamed U.S. officials cited by Axios said Trump was seriously considering entering the conflict by launching strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Trump warned on Truth Social earlier Tuesday: “We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding,” referring to Khamenei, who is increasingly isolated after Israel assassinated several of his top generals, adding Khamenei is “safe” and “we are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now,” but said “our patience is wearing thin.”

Key Background

On Monday, Trump exited the G7 summit earlier than scheduled and flew back from Canada to Washington as tensions between Iran and Israel escalated, with the White House press secretary saying he left early “because of what’s going on in the Middle East.” Shortly before leaving the summit, Trump issued an ominous warning to residents of Tehran, Iran’s capital, on Truth Social: “Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON…Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!” At the time, Trump did not specify why he called for an evacuation of the city of 10 million people, but when asked later Trump said “I want people to be safe…That’s always possible something could happen. I just want people to be safe.” The president spoke to reporters on board Air Force One on his return to Washington and said he wanted something better than a ceasefire “An end. A real end, not a ceasefire, an end,” and signaled that a only complete “give up” by Iran would be acceptable.

What Has Trump Said About Striking Iran?

In a earlier post Trump, said: “We now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran…Iran had good sky trackers and other defensive equipment, and plenty of it, but it doesn’t compare to American made, conceived, and manufactured stuff. Nobody does it better than the good ol’ USA.” In a third post Tuesday morning, Trump called for an “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!” Trump has also warned Iran against targeting U.S. personnel or assets, saying if that happens “we’ll come down so hard, it’d be gloves off…I think they know not to touch our troops.”

Is Trump Pushing For An Iran-Israel Cease Fire?

On Monday, Trump told reporters onboard Air Force One on the way back to the U.S. from the summit in Canada he wanted to see an end to Iran’s nuclear program and said he’s “not too much in the mood to negotiate now.” Trump attacked French President Emmanuel Macron on Truth Social, describing him as “publicity seeking” after he said Trump was flying out of the G7 summit early to work out a cease fire between Israel and Iran and “then kick-start broader discussions.” Trump said Macron “has no idea why I am now on my way to Washington, but it certainly has nothing to do with a Cease Fire,” and claimed it was something “Much bigger than that.” Trump departed the G7 Summit early and returned to Washington on Monday night to “attend to many important matters,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said.

What Else Do We Know About Trump’s Early Exit From The G7 Summit?

Shortly before he left Canada, the president told reporters Iran “want to make a deal, and as soon as I leave here, we’re going to be doing something. But I have to leave here.” Fox News reported on Monday evening that Trump had asked his national security to be present in the Situation Room when he returns to the White House.

What Was Mentioned In The G7 Leaders’ Statement?

A U.S. official told reporters earlier on Monday Trump would not sign a draft statement of G7 leaders, which included a call for de-escalating the Israel-Iran conflict. The president eventually agreed to sign it after some changes were made to the statement’s “initial draft language,” according to the New York Times. The final statement notes: “We, the leaders of the G7, reiterate our commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East.” The statement affirms Israel’s “right to defend itself,” describes Iran as the “principal source of regional instability and terror,” and notes “Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.” It also calls for a resolution of the ongoing crisis and “a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a cease fire in Gaza.”

What Has Iran Said About Potential Talks With The U.s.?

In a post on X, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi signaled he was open to talks resuming talks with the U.S. if Israel’s strikes on Iran were halted. “If President Trump is genuine about diplomacy and interested in stopping this war, next steps are consequential. Israel must halt its aggression, and absent a total cessation of military aggression against us, our responses will continue. It takes one phone call from Washington to muzzle someone like Netanyahu. That may pave the way for a return to diplomacy,” he wrote. The post also attacked Netanyahu, calling him a “war criminal.”

Further Reading

Lawmakers Make Bipartisan Push To Restrict Trump From Going To War With Iran (Forbes)

Iranian Missiles Cause ‘Minor Damage’ To US Embassy In Tel Aviv—Israel Targets Elite Quds Force HQ (Forbes)

Israel Attacks Iranian State TV During Live Broadcast (Forbes)

The Israel-Iran conflict further intensified on Tuesday with US President Donald Trump fanning the flames, issuing veiled threats at the Supreme Leader of Iran and demanding the “unconditional surrender” of the Islamic Republic.

Both parties traded fire for the sixth consecutive day, with Israel launching attacks at Tehran’s District 18 area, near the Mehrabad airport. Iran’s missile attacks hit several parts of Tel Aviv on the dawn of Wednesday, causing significant damage.

In a Truth Social post, the US president warned Iran that it had total control over the skies of Tehran and also information on the whereabouts of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. US officials have revealed that Trump had nixed a plan by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to assassinate Khamenei.

In apparent response to Trump’s comments, Khamenei posted on X, “…the battle begins.”

At a G7 summit in Canada, leaders including Trump had on Monday called for “de-escalation,” while also stressing that Israel, which is the sole but undeclared nuclear power in the Middle East, had “the right to defend itself” and that “Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.”

Meanwhile, China accused Trump of “pouring oil” on the conflict, while Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan accused Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu of being “the biggest threat to the security of the region.”

At least 224 people, including 70 women and children, have been killed in Iran since Israel launched a massive and unprovoked attack on the Islamic Republic on June 13. The attack also killed several of Iran’s highest military officials and senior nuclear scientists. Iran’s retaliatory missile attacks have wreaked havoc in central and northern Israel, killing at least 24.