The early morning attack on June 13 by the Zionist regime against Iran—accompanied by Trump’s public reaction and acknowledgment of America’s behind-the-scenes role—marks a significant turning point in the strategic confrontation between Tehran, Tel Aviv, and Washington. In a candid statement, Trump claimed: “I told the Iranians what to do, but they didn’t,” adding, “Now heavy blows have been dealt to Iran, and more are on the way.”
This stark admission not only reinforces Washington’s central role in the planning and execution of the terrorist assault, but also signals a formal US partnership in an operation that could ignite an all-out war in the region. Trump’s declaration clearly shows that the Israeli strike was not a standalone act by Tel Aviv, but rather a military extension of Trump’s foreign policy towards Iran, orchestrated jointly with Washington. His blunt remark—“We gave them a chance, and they didn’t take it”—underscores that this attack cannot be viewed as solely an Israeli action. Instead, it should be regarded as an arm of American military policy directed at Iran.
Meanwhile, the prior order from Washington to withdraw US forces from certain regional bases—particularly in Iraq and the Persian Gulf—is a telling sign that the American government was fully aware of Israel’s planned assault and its potential consequences. In military terms, such a move is often seen as a form of "strategic pre-defense": a step taken to limit the costs of an anticipated Iranian response to an operation that US officials clearly expected to provoke retaliation. This suspicious maneuver further proves that the US played an active role in directing the attack on Iran and must be held accountable.
Under international law, any direct or indirect attack on a country without a mandate from the UN Security Council constitutes an act of aggression. According to the United Nations Charter—specifically Article 51—Iran has the right to self-defense. As such, Iran's response, whether against Israel as the direct perpetrator or the US as a strategic partner in the aggression, will be rooted in the principles of legitimate defense and internationally recognized legal norms. American officials are aware of this—and the pre-emptive withdrawal from certain regional positions is a clear sign of their apprehension. In this context, all US bases across the region, from Tehran’s perspective, may be considered legitimate defensive targets.
The host countries of these military bases, fully aware of the risks and realities, have effectively entered a conflict that neither serves their national interests nor contributes to regional security. By accepting the US military presence and potentially becoming complicit in aggression against Iran, these states have exposed themselves to a level of tension that could escalate well beyond their initial calculations.
The coming hours and days could prove to be among the most sensitive and volatile in the region over the past decade. Iran has repeatedly declared that it will not remain indifferent in the face of aggression, warning that “those who ignite the fire must pay the price.” If the recent attack goes unanswered, it would establish a dangerous precedent in regional order—where global powers or their proxies can violate national sovereignty with impunity. But if a response comes—as Iran has promised—it could mark the beginning of serious geopolitical shifts and a redefinition of security red lines in West Asia.
With his latest remarks, Trump has not only brought Israel out from behind the curtain but also officially placed the United States among the ranks of aggressors. In the face of such developments, no excuse or denial remains credible. The aggression has taken place—and retaliation is a lawful and legitimate right of the Islamic Republic of Iran. What follows depends on the resolve of decision-makers in Tehran and on how seriously the adventurist parties grasp the potential costs of their provocations.
NOURNEWS