New Delhi: The United States’ pre-dawn strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan have plunged the region into a new phase of destabilisation, threatening to shatter the fragile balance that has long deterred direct conflict the two countries.
While Trump has warned Tehran of further attacks if Iran retaliates, the Islamic nation’s leadership faces a critical decision: how to respond without risking its survival.
Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi called the strikes a “violent act against international laws” and warned of “everlasting consequences”. In the coming days, it will become clear how Tehran retaliates. Here are five potential ways Iran could choose to respond:
Direct military retaliation on US bases
Iran may opt for a high-profile military response by striking American bases in neighbouring Iraq, the Gulf, or even within reach of its short-to-medium range missiles. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has previously signalled its readiness to escalate if provoked. It warned the US to “expect regrettable responses” to its strikes on Tehran’s nuclear sites, in a statement carried by state TV. The group said that it would “use options beyond the understanding… of the aggressor front, and the aggressors of this land must expect regrettable responses”.
It has meanwhile launched missile attacks on Israel. An attack by IRGC on US bases could potentially trigger a wider war that could devastate Iran’s military infrastructure and threaten regime stability.
Closure or disruption of the Strait of Hormuz
Iran’s navy could attempt to blockade the Strait of Hormuz — the world’s most critical oil chokepoint through which nearly 20 million barrels of oil pass daily. According to reports, Commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Navy Brigadier General Tangsiri has said that the Strait of Hormuz will be closed very soon.
Mines, missile threats, or fast-attack boats could quickly paralyse global shipping and spike oil prices worldwide. However, any move to shut the strait could invite immediate and overwhelming international military retaliation.
Proxy attacks through regional militias
Iran may activate its so-called “Axis of Resistance”, encouraging proxy groups like the Houthis in Yemen, or Iraqi Shiite militias, to target US military personnel and assets across the region. While Hezbollah and Hamas have become irrelevant, and even its traditional proxy capabilities have eroded, making this option less effective than in previous confrontations.
Cyberattacks and covert operations
A less visible but potentially disruptive path involves cyber warfare and covert operations. Iran has a well-established cyber unit capable of targeting US infrastructure, financial systems, or critical industries.
Such attacks offer plausible deniability and avoid open conflict but could still invite cyber countermeasures or even kinetic responses, depending on their severity.
Strategic patience or diplomatic measures
Iran may choose to delay its response and instead build international sympathy through legal and diplomatic channels, portraying itself as the victim of an illegal act of aggression. It may also quietly accelerate its nuclear programme in defiance, withdrawing further from global agreements.
This path carries the risk of looking weak at home, where hardliners may pressure the regime to retaliate militarily. It could also reduce Iran’s leverage in any future negotiations over sanctions relief or regional de-escalation.
Iran is currently staring at a dangerous crossroad, the options before it are all fraught with risk. A direct confrontation could lead to devastation, while restraint might erode its credibility.
