Below Senior Fellow Can Kasapoğlu offers a tactical and strategic overview of Operation Rising Lion.
Executive Summary
- Israel struck Iran’s nuclear facilities and key leaders of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in an apparently unilateral operation.
- Iran’s initial response was restrained and cautious. But the situation could escalate as the Islamic Republic conducts a thorough assessment of the battle damage. Iran’s decision to launch a large number of ballistic missiles at Israeli population centers signals a potentially serious escalation.
- Whether the Trump administration engages or continues its posture of restraint will affect the conflict’s trajectory.
- Israel possesses a clear advantage in escalation dominance. But Iran could pursue a prolonged war of attrition, which would have uncertain consequences and place a heavy defense industrial burden on Israel and its allies.
Operation Rising Lion
In the early morning hours of Friday, June 13, Israel conducted a series of unprecedented strikes inside Iran. Dubbed Operation Rising Lion, the Israeli action hit Iranian nuclear facilities and eliminated several key scientists, as well as top figures within the Islamic Republic’s security apparatus and military.
The Israeli Air Force dispatched more than 200 combat aircraft to deliver 330 munitions against roughly 100 targets deep inside Iran. While the campaign appears to have been a unilateral Israeli military action conducted without the active involvement of the United States, President Donald Trump warned Tehran that more “brutal” airstrikes would followif Iran failed to cut a deal to end its nuclear weapons program.
Israel’s previous strikes, which destroyed a significant portion of Iran’s air defenses, paved the way for the current campaign. Operation Rising Lion pursued a decapitation strategythat involved targeting and killing the Iranian military’s command echelon, including (1) the commander-in-chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), General Hossein Salami, (2) the Iranian Armed Forces’ chief of staff, General Mohammad Bagheri, and (3) the commander of the Revolutionary Guards’ air component, General Amir Ali Hajizadeh. The IRGC oversees Iran’s core disruptive military capabilities, including drone warfare and missile warfare systems, as well as the regime’s network of proxy militias.
In addition to targeting Iran’s most prominent military figures, Israel hit Iran’s nuclear sites. The facility at Natanz, an integral part of Iran’s nuclear program, suffered particularly notable damage. Additionally, Israel targeted several air defense sites, radar installations, and ballistic missile facilities, reducing Iran’s ability to retaliate quickly.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) also assassinated several nuclear scientists who had played key roles in Iran’s defense technological and industrial base, including Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi and Fereydoon Abbasi. Ali Shamkhani, an important advisor to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, was also eliminated in the operation. An ethnic Ahvaz Arab and a shrewd politician with sharp instincts and networking skills, Shamkhani had served as Iran’s natural envoy to several Arab nations; most notably, he was Tehran’s lead negotiator when restoring diplomatic ties with Saudi Arabia.
The Timing of the Israeli Operation
Israel’s strikes came as the Islamic Republic appeared to be ramping up its nuclear activity—despite the fact that Iran is engaged in discussions on limiting that very activity with envoys from the Trump administration.
In those discussions, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had aimed to preserve Iran’s nuclear weapons infrastructure and its capacity to enrich uranium. Tehran wished to maintain its position on the nuclear threshold while also receiving sanctions relief.
The Islamic Republic’s rapid progress in nuclear technologies was motivating Araghchi’s bold negotiating position. Prior to Operation Rising Lion, Iran possessed the ability to enrich military-grade uranium in a matter of months. Tehran’s estimated breakout time—the duration it will need before it can guarantee a weapons-grade and military purposed nuclear capability—was becoming shorter by the week.
Iran’s shortened breakout timewas due in large part to its improving centrifuge technologies. When the Obama administration signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015, Tehran’s IR-1 centrifuges gave Iran a 12-month breakout time. Iran’s current centrifuge capabilities give the Islamic Republic an enrichment output four times larger than it had in 2015. Prior to Israel’s strikes, analysts estimated that Iran’s Fordow and Natanz sites alone could have produced a nuclear bomb within four months.
Iran’s Response
As of this writing, Iran had mustered a weak response to Operation Rising Lion. The Islamic Republic launched hundreds of drones, primarily Shahed variants, at Israel. While these systems are formidable, they function most effectively when combined with other long-range strike assets such as ballistic and cruise missiles. Thus far, IRGC units have not targeted Israel with their most potent ballistic missiles, which boast rapid launch cycles and robust reentry capabilities.
Israel’s decapitation of the IRGC’s leadership is no doubt impeding Tehran’s response. Intelligence reports also suggest that Mossad, Israel’s national intelligence service, orchestrated a series of covert operations deep inside Iran to degrade or eliminate the country’s strategic missile capabilities. Reportedly, Israeli units set up at least one attack drone stationinside Iran, echoing Ukraine’s efforts in the recently conducted Operation Spiderweb.
Whether Iran will escalate its retaliatory efforts remains to be seen. The Islamic Republic’s remaining leaders could choose to strike rapidly by launching massive barrages. Nonetheless, they may pursue a more calculated approach while working covertly toward a military-grade nuclear deterrent and a possible exit from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. If Tehran opts to continue its nuclear pursuits, it will need to hope that the United States military does not become involved. The US strategic bomber fleet and its GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator munitions can take out the hardened shelters on which Iran’s nuclear program relies.
If Iran opts to retaliate quickly, high-end missiles will likely be its weapon of choice. The solid-propellant Fattah-1 and Kheibar Shekan medium-range ballistic missiles, which Tehran employed during its October 2024 attacks on Israel, could play a role in any strike. New systems could also see their combat debut, such as the Khorramshahr, a derivative of North Korean Musudan ballistic missiles. To penetrate Israeli airspace, Iran would likely attempt to hit or overwhelm Israel’s high-endo-atmospheric and exo-atmospheric missile defense systems: the US-provided Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and the joint US-Israeli Arrow baseline.
Moving Forward
Operation Rising Lion remains ongoing and will not resemble the quick-strike operations Israel conducted against nuclear weapons facilities in Osiraq, Iraq, in 1981 or in al-Kibar, Syria, in 2007. This operation will be a long-lasting political-military engagement with many moving parts. Moving forward, Iran and Israel will likely engage in an escalation dominance power play—a dynamic that has so far favored Israel. With its proxy network hit hard and its air defenses crippled, Iran is in a weaker position now than at any time in the last decade.
Nonetheless, an open-ended and highly attritional conflict could stress Israel, particularly in the absence of active US military involvement. The extent of the Trump administration’s willingness to engage in the Middle East will do much to dictate the trajectory of events in the coming months.