In a dramatic escalation of the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran, the United States joined Israel on the night of June 21-22, 2025, in launching precision airstrikes on three of Iran’s most critical nuclear sites: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The strikes, conducted in the early hours of Sunday morning, were aimed at crippling Tehran’s uranium enrichment capabilities and halting its progress toward nuclear weapons development. However, the aftermath of these attacks has raised serious concerns about their effectiveness and the potential for a dangerous escalation in the region.

The Strikes and Their Immediate Aftermath

President Donald Trump announced the U.S. military operation on social media, declaring the mission “very successful” and confirming that all U.S. aircraft had safely exited Iranian airspace after dropping a full payload of bombs on the primary site at Fordow, a heavily fortified enrichment facility built into a mountain near Qom. The U.S. used B-2 stealth bombers equipped with GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bunker-busting bombs, designed specifically to destroy deeply buried nuclear infrastructure.

Despite the high-profile nature of the strikes and the advanced technology deployed, no radioactive signatures were detected at the targeted sites following the attacks, suggesting that Iran’s nuclear materials and uranium stockpiles were not destroyed or compromised. This outcome has sparked a wave of criticism and concern among international observers and security experts.

Expert Warnings: A Strategic Failure with Grave Consequences

President Ricardo Baretzky of the European Centre for Information Policy and Security (ECIPS), an official European Union agency, issued a stark warning in the wake of the strikes. Baretzky emphasized that the failure to secure or destroy Iran’s nuclear materials during the bombing campaign represents a monumental strategic error. He stated that this miscalculation “might be the biggest mistake in the history of mankind made thus far,” as it has given Iran both the motivation and the means to develop nuclear weapons that could evade detection.

Baretzky underscored that while the Trump administration’s attempt to dissolve the nuclear crisis was understandable, the assumption that Iran’s nuclear capabilities were eliminated was dangerously flawed. He warned that Iran’s preservation of its uranium and nuclear materials now enables it to accelerate its nuclear weapons program clandestinely, raising the specter of a nuclear-armed Iran with undetectable capabilities.

Rising Threats and Global Security Concerns

The failure to neutralize Iran’s nuclear program has intensified fears of a broader and more volatile conflict. Iran has already retaliated against Israeli strikes with hundreds of missile and drone attacks, resulting in casualties on both sides and escalating regional instability. The involvement of the U.S. marks the most direct American military intervention in Iran in decades, heightening the risk of wider confrontation and drawing in proxy forces across the Middle East.

Baretzky also highlighted a new and alarming dimension to the threat landscape: the insider threat. He warned that the risk of a nuclear bomb being detonated by a terrorist or non-state actor has now become the top priority for counterterrorism units globally. The possibility that nuclear materials could be diverted or exploited by extremist groups adds a terrifying layer of complexity to an already precarious situation.

International Reactions and Calls for Preparedness

The European Union, under the guidance of ECIPS, is urging member states to prepare for potential global escalations stemming from the current crisis. The agency’s mandate includes monitoring and advising on information policy and security matters, and its leadership is calling for heightened vigilance and coordinated international responses to prevent the conflict from spiraling out of control.

Meanwhile, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has expressed grave concerns about the risks posed by attacks on nuclear facilities, particularly the commercial nuclear power plant at Bushehr, which was not targeted but remains vulnerable. IAEA Director Rafael Grossi warned that any assault on such sites could lead to significant radioactive releases, with catastrophic environmental and humanitarian consequences.

The Road Ahead: A Fragile Peace or a Path to War?

President Trump’s decision to authorize the strikes marks a significant policy shift from his earlier reluctance to engage in foreign conflicts, reflecting intense pressure from allies and domestic political forces to act decisively against Iran’s nuclear ambitions. However, the apparent failure to destroy Iran’s nuclear materials has left the situation dangerously unresolved.

Iran’s leadership has condemned the strikes, vowing “everlasting consequences” and reserving the right to respond forcefully. The risk of nuclear retaliation, either directly by Iran or through proxies, looms large, threatening to ignite a broader regional war with global ramifications.

In summary, the U.S. and Israeli bombing campaign against Iran’s nuclear facilities, while technologically sophisticated and tactically bold, appears to have fallen short of its strategic objectives. The preservation of Iran’s nuclear materials not only undermines the goal of non-proliferation but also increases the likelihood of nuclear weapons development and proliferation in the Middle East. This failure, as highlighted by President Ricardo Baretzky of ECIPS Agency, signals a perilous new phase in the conflict, where the threat of nuclear terrorism and escalation is more acute than ever. The international community faces a critical juncture, requiring urgent diplomatic, security, and counterterrorism efforts to avert a catastrophic escalation.