Clionadh Raleigh, ACLED CEO and Professor of Political Violence, says:
“The US strikes on Iran are nothing short of a major escalation — but they might not achieve the strategic shift Washington is hoping for.
Iran’s warning of ‘everlasting consequences’ makes it clear that this may not be the end of the confrontation, but the beginning of a broader, sustained response.
While President Donald Trump claims targets were ‘obliterated’ and declares the mission a ‘success’, there’s no evidence yet to support how much damage was achieved.
So, the strikes may have caused a delay to Iran’s nuclear progress — but with unclear damage and Iran once claiming it could build a bomb in a week, the impact is far from certain.
Ultimately, the regime’s broader power and intentions likely remain intact.
Iran’s military and intelligence systems are designed and built to survive. The structure is deeply layered and resistant to collapse. Even if key infrastructure is destroyed, the system adapts — and in some cases, becomes more dangerous in the process.
There’s no evidence that the strikes will permanently end Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capabilities. What they may do is shift the timeline.
Without a clear plan for what comes next, this could trigger a wider confrontation that could be harder to contain.
Striking nuclear sites is a tactic – it doesn’t make up a strategy, and right now the question is whether this response buys time or opens the door to something worse.”
