War ended when Israelis turned to US for help
American military bases in region now in question
By Shadab Asgari
Author, historian
Iran’s missile strike on the United States’ largest regional airbase marked the end of a 12-day war between the Islamic Republic and Israel. According to Article 51 of the UN Charter (1948), any state subjected to military aggression has the legitimate right to defend itself with force.
The US launched a military attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities, an act it openly admitted. From a legal and moral standpoint, nothing barred Iran from responding. The aggressor had revealed itself. Accordingly, Iran exercised its right of self-defense by targeting a US military base. Any hesitation would have emboldened Washington and undermined Tehran’s international standing.
This wasn’t the first act of duplicity. Months earlier, the US had lured Iran into negotiations, only to pave the way for a surprise Israeli attack during those talks. This military assault came despite no evidence of nuclear weapons activity in Iran. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi later confirmed, after several Iranian scientists and commanders were assassinated, that no such indication had been found.
Iran’s credibility would have been destroyed had it not responded. National pride is of profound importance to Iranians. Many are ready to die before allowing their honor to be violated. This deeply rooted sentiment is not political, it is generational and cultural.
Iranians, regardless of political persuasion, cannot accept foreign military aggression. On several fronts, the US miscalculated. Its bases in the region are particularly vulnerable, something Washington is fully aware of. Compared to Israel, these bases lack layered defenses. Iran’s missile retaliation not only matched the US aggression but cast serious doubt on the future of US military presence in the region.
Local populations increasingly question the rationale for hosting American forces, seeing them as a source of danger. Iran maintains cordial relations with regional states, including Qatar. US military presence benefits no one, not even Americans. Wars in the Middle East have consistently faced domestic backlash in the US, especially due to troop casualties. In Iraq, 4,600 American soldiers died in less than a decade, sparking widespread protest.
That very discontent helped Barack Obama win the presidency, defeating pro-war Republicans. Today, over 160 US military bases surround Iran. Should Tehran choose to respond, its missile arsenal is capable of striking all of them, potentially killing 50,000 US troops. If 4,600 deaths were unacceptable to the American public, they will not tolerate such a staggering loss. The Senate will likely hold Donald Trump accountable for this escalation, and public protests in the US are foreseeable.
Trump’s mistake was falling for Benjamin Netanyahu’s provocation and launching an attack. As former Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said, Israel is “weaker than a spider’s web.” Iran’s strategic depth is 75 times greater than Israel’s. In the case of simultaneous strikes, Iran’s vulnerability is minimal. During this 12-day war, 80% of Israeli territory came under fire. Israeli security was wiped out, while most of Iran remained unaffected.
Israel’s 9 million population, most holding dual passports, contrast sharply with Iran’s 90 million rooted people. Israelis often flee at the first sign of danger. Even Israeli-born children receive second passports at birth. This speaks to their lack of rootedness. In contrast, Iranians, like trees in a wildfire, endure.
There is no trust in cease-fires with Israel. Past truces with Lebanon and Gaza were all broken. Israel honors no agreements and its leaders are fearful. Their calculation in waging a war with Iran was based on the belief that assassinating top commanders would paralyze Iran’s military. But the opposite happened.
The people acted first. Just hours after the assassinations, massive crowds marched during Eid al-Ghadir, showing no fear of Israeli aggression. This public defiance sent a clear signal.
Next came the Iranian Leader’s move. Thanks to pre-existing planning, Iran quickly replaced its fallen commanders, within just 12 hours. Nowhere else in the world has such rapid leadership transition occurred, followed immediately by military action. Iran’s chain of command, unlike that of many states, remains resilient and ready.
The US should never have entered this war on Israel’s behalf. The strike on the American base in Qatar was only the beginning. Iran’s missiles can reach up to 2,000 kilometers, easily targeting US bases in the region and even into Europe. If war continues, Tehran is prepared. The Iranian people are battle-hardened and will never surrender.
Compared to the 1980–88 Iran-Iraq war, this conflict is far less daunting. At that time, Iran’s post-revolution government was only 19 months old. Commanders were inexperienced, and the political system was still finding its footing. President Banisadr had not yet formed a cabinet, and disputes over the prime minister persisted. Today, Iran’s defense and combat readiness are in an entirely different league.
Back then, Iran possessed only a few pre-revolution missiles with limited range and poor accuracy. Today, its arsenal includes precision-guided missiles that travel 15 times the speed of sound with pinpoint accuracy. The number of these weapons remains classified, but Iran’s adversaries are well aware of their capabilities.
Israel, too, now recognizes its limits. The regime knows it cannot sustain a military confrontation with Iran. That’s why it turned to Washington.
In my view, the war ended the moment Israel called on the United States for help. In previous conflicts, whether in Lebanon or Gaza, Israel managed on its own. This time, it was overwhelmed and resorted to US intervention.