India’s judiciary is collapsing under delays, inconsistency, and lost trust. We explore why a bold fusion of Civil Law, Common Law, and Dharmic principles is the only path to revive justice—and save India’s democracy from slow decay.
Pakistan’s generals thrive on chaos, using endless jihad to justify power while destroying their nation. Today we uncovers how fire, ruin, and perpetual conflict define Pakistan’s strategy, and why understanding this is key to India’s security and regional stability.
China’s new Harmony OS is gearing up to challenge Apple, Microsoft, and Google. While it may not dethrone these giants immediately, its arrival signals that non-US players are entering the operating system race. It reflects China’s ambition to reduce tech dependence on the West with its own options
Israel has shattered the old playbook of Middle Eastern warfare. What began with the decimation of Iran's proxies has culminated in a direct assault on Iran itself. The global alignments now laid bare, and the irreversible shift in regional power dynamics.
The last century was defined by the Nuclear weapons and their impact on power structures. Power Structures that were created because of the swagger and perfidy of the global powers like the USA and the USSR.
Between them they committed many mistakes out of plain hubris.
Today, Iran and Pakistan stand out there with defiance of the world order, brandishing their nukes.
He ensured that Pakistan got its nuclear reactor and the bomb and Pakistan then handed its own nuke designs to Iran.
Israel and India are at the receiving end of these two anomalies.
The last couple of years and the coming 3-4 years will be a battle to undo what Reagan and his successors allowed in the 1990s.
SUPPORT DRISHTIKONE
In an increasingly complex and shifting world, thoughtful analysis is rare and essential. At Drishtikone, we dedicate hundreds of dollars and hours each month to producing deep, independent insights on geopolitics, culture, and global trends. Our work is rigorous, fearless, and free from advertising and external influence, sustained solely by the support of readers like you. For over two decades, Drishtikone has remained a one-person labor of commitment: no staff, no corporate funding — just a deep belief in the importance of perspective, truth, and analysis. If our work helps you better understand the forces shaping our world, we invite you to support it with your contribution by subscribing to the paid version or a one-time gift. Your support directly fuels independent thinking. To contribute, choose the USD equivalent amount you are comfortable with in your own currency. You can head to the Contribute page and use Stripe or PayPal to make a contribution.
On June 13, 2025, Israel launched what may be the most decisive military operation in Middle Eastern history.
The codename is "Operation Rising Lion". The name comes from the Biblical Book of Numbers and also has a resonance with the Iranians who oppose the Mullah regime. That is significant.
On June 12, in a quiet yet symbolic gesture, Netanyahu had visited Jerusalem’s Western Wall and placed a handwritten note between the stones. At the time, it seemed like a moment of reflection. But as revealed later by the Jerusalem Post, the message was a cryptic signal, foreshadowing the launch of Israel’s bold military operation against Iran: Operation Rising Lion. A prayer. A warning. A declaration of war. (Source: Economic Times)
In Hebrew, this operation is called Am K’Lavi.
This translates to - “See what God has done. A people rises like a lioness (Am K’Lavi), lifts itself up like a lion.”
The Israeli forces struck Iranian nuclear facilities, military installations, and leadership across more than a dozen locations, marking the largest attack on Iran since the Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s.
The strikes by Israel had a distinct character to it. They have been surgical. And yet they have been devastating. The core nuclear facilities at Natanz, Fordow, and Khondab have been targeted.
Key Iranian military leaders, including Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander Hossein Salami, Iranian Armed Forces Chief of Staff Major General Mohammad Bagheri, and at least nine nuclear scientists central to Iran's weapons program have been eliminated within a matter of a few hours!
An attempt was also made on Sunday by Israel to eliminate the Houthi leader Ghamari, but the IDF statement says that they weren't sure if he had been eliminated.
The IDF on Sunday said it was still not sure if it had succeeded in killing senior Houthi military leader Muhammad Abd al-Karim al-Ghamari. On Saturday night, the IDF conducted strikes in Yemen in an attempted targeted attack on al-Karim al-Ghamari, IDF sources confirmed to The Jerusalem Post. "We will soon know if it succeeded," another Israeli source told the Post. (Source: The Jerusalem Post)
As spectacular as it looks, it is a triumph of Israeli intelligence Mossad which made this possible.
Far from the headlines and media speculation, the operation was years in the making. Israeli intelligence had successfully infiltrated Iranian networks, with Mossad operatives embedded in Iran for months in advance. A dedicated intelligence unit was built solely to map Iran’s nuclear capabilities in real time—an extraordinary feat given the closed nature of Iran’s nuclear facilities and counterintelligence apparatus.
To ensure total operational surprise, Israeli planners executed a disinformation campaign of stunning sophistication. A string of seemingly unrelated events—Netanyahu’s alleged illness, a family wedding, and publicized tensions with Donald Trump—were intentionally seeded into the media.
Each was designed with one goal: to convince Iranian intelligence that Israel lacked both the political will and operational readiness for a strike.
Even Trump’s public admonitions urging Israel not to attack were part of the deception. These statements, meant to be leaked, created the illusion of disunity between Jerusalem and Washington, just as secret nuclear talks with Iran were seemingly progressing.
Meanwhile, in speeches across 2024 and early 2025, Netanyahu dropped symbolic references to “Amkila”—a rarely used biblical term meaning “a nation will roar like a lion.” These "Easter eggs", if you will, were subtle signals, hidden in plain sight.
Netanyahu clarified that the attacks are aimed at eliminating Iran's nuclear threat and would continue as long as needed.
Iran attacked Israel with a barrage of missiles as well.
On Sunday morning, Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz intensified the country’s aggressive posture toward Iran, declaring that the Israeli Air Force would “destroy and burn to the ground” any military-linked site in Tehran.
His statement marks a significant escalation in statements and military resolve. This was after the multiple waves of Iranian ballistic missile attacks on Israel over the past two days, which have killed at least 10 people and wounded more than 250, prompting Israel to prepare for broader retaliatory strikes.
The Iranian foreign minister doubled down on the Iranian actions of continuously attacking Israel going forward. Iran is not backing down.
Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that the attacks on Israel will end when its 'aggression stops.' He also accused the UN Security Council of 'indifference' over Israel's attacks on Tehran. He claimed in a meeting with foreign diplomats that Western governments have 'condemned Iran instead of Israel despite it being the side that was violated.' He also claimed to have 'solid proof' that American troops have supported Israel's strikes against Iran on Thursday night, the event that directly led to this weekend's escalating violence. He said: 'We have solid proof of the support of the American forces and American bases in the region for the attacks of the Zionist regime military forces.' (Source: The Daily Mail)
Meanwhile, here is an interesting thought. The Iranians outside of Iran are extremely happy with the Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites and the IRGC leaders.
To understand the context of where we are, it is imperative that we know the history of what is happening today.
Let's not go way back into the religious and war history. Let's start with the nuclear weapons program of Iran.
But to understand how Iran got its nukes, we will have to go back in time a bit.
In one of the most consequential acts of nuclear proliferation in modern history, Pakistan's journey to becoming a nuclear power—and Iran’s acquisition of nuclear technology—was not just homegrown but powered by theft, deception, and a covert assist from the Reagan administration.
Abdul Qadeer Khan, a Pakistani metallurgist working in the Netherlands during the 1970s, stole centrifuge designs from NATO-linked URENCO facilities in Amsterdam. These stolen blueprints became the foundation of Pakistan's P1 centrifuge program. Despite being technically flawed, the P1 allowed Pakistan to begin enriching uranium. Later, with improvements, the program evolved into the more robust P2 model using maraging steel.
During the 1980s, under the pretext of Cold War necessity, the Reagan administration quietly enabled Pakistan's nuclear ambitions. The U.S. State Department, desperate to keep Pakistan as a frontline ally against the Soviets in Afghanistan, overruled its own intelligence and customs officials. As whistleblower Richard Barlow later uncovered, the CIA and other agencies flagged Pakistani efforts to acquire sensitive components from the U.S., but their concerns were suppressed. State Department officials not only downplayed violations but actively misled Congress and inspectors, allowing Khan’s network to acquire the technology needed for nuclear weaponization quietly. Read about the detailed exposé here:
Desh Kapoor
But Pakistan didn’t stop at self-sufficiency. In the 1990s and early 2000s, A.Q. Khan began selling nuclear technology to other regimes, including Iran. Iran’s IR1 centrifuges are direct descendants of Pakistan’s P1 design—an aluminum-based model prone to breakdowns. Iran later acquired the more efficient P2-based designs, using maraging steel, from Khan’s network. Iran has since refined these designs, integrating carbon fiber components in its IR2 and later models, making them more stable and efficient.
The design of Iran's IR1 model was originally based upon Pakistan's P1 reactor, the South Asian nuclear power's first centrifuge. Using an aluminum cylinder, the P1 proved to be unreliable, as has Iran's IR1. Iran's 1,000 IR2 centrifuges are based on the design of Pakistan's P2 model that A. Q. Khan had sold to Iran two decades ago. These centrifuges are stronger because they use maraging steel. Iran has improved on the Pakistani design with its current IR2 model, which like Iran's subsequent and more sophisticated models features carbon fiber parts. (Source: Iran's Enrichment Gambit will Create a Breach Beyond Repair / The Lester and Sally Entin Faculty of Humanities Tel Aviv University)
After this, let's jump to the actions that Israel took against Iran to stymie its nuclear advance.
2010: The Stuxnet computer worm (widely attributed to U.S.–Israeli intelligence) is discovered after wreaking havoc on Iran’s uranium enrichment centrifuge. This marks the first known cyber-attack on Iran’s nuclear program and foreshadows a decade of clandestine cyber warfare.
2011–2015: Israel and Iran exchanged covert blows. Iranian agents were linked to attacks on Israeli diplomats abroad, while Mossad carries out espionage in Iran. In 2015, Iran agrees to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with major powers, freezing parts of its nuclear program. This temporarily cooled tensions, though Iran’s ballistic missile tests and regional activities continued to worry Israel. Between 2011 and 2015, there were several attacks targeting Israeli diplomats and diplomatic missions worldwide, with Israel accusing Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah, of being behind them. These attacks were part of a broader covert war between Iran and Israel. Key incidents during this period include:
2018: On 31 January 2018, fewer than two dozen Mossad agents infiltrated a secret warehouse in the Kahrizak District of southern Tehran (the capital city of Iran), and pilfered 100,000 documents, including paper records and computer files, documenting the nuclear weapons work of Iran's AMAD Project between 1999 and 2003.
Mossad has conducted many daring missions - the capture of Adolf Eichmann, Operation Brothers, and the Dubai-Hamas operation among them - but as heists go, the 2018 Iranian warehouse robbery is in a league of its own - so much so, it won the Israel Security Prize. In a high-stakes operation deep within Tehran, Mossad infiltrated an Iranian government warehouse looking for evidence that Iran had tried to manufacture a nuclear bomb rather than use its program for peaceful purposes. (Source: Mossad’s Heist of Iranian Nuclear Secrets Was an International Game Changer / Spyscape)
Meanwhile, the US exited the JCPOA, re-imposing sanctions. Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu publicizes the “Iran Nuclear Archive” seized by Mossad, claiming it proved Iran deceived the world about past bomb efforts. With the nuclear deal unraveling, Israeli covert operations intensified at this point. Over the next two years, Iran suffered numerous unexplained fires and blasts at military and nuclear sites, widely attributed to Israeli or allied sabotage.
2020: A July explosion at Natanz severely damages a centrifuge workshop.
In November, Iran’s top nuclear scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, was assassinated near Tehran. Mehsen was he head of Iran's Organisation of Defensive Innovation and Research, known by its Persian acronym SPND.
Meanwhile, Iran-backed militias targeted U.S. bases in Iraq and Syria with rocket strikes, indirectly pressuring Israel as well.
2021–2022: Tit-for-tat covert strikes continue. In April 2021, a sabotage incident causes a blackout at Natanz during an upgrade of enrichment capacity – Iran again points to Israel.
In April 2021, the Natanz site experienced a blackout that Iran blamed on sabotage by Israel. This event created uncertainty for the diplomatic efforts underway to attempt restoration of the JCPOA. (Source: Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI))
Iran began enriching uranium to 60% shortly after that. Throughout 2022, mysterious deaths afflict Iranian defense scientists and officers. Iran accuses Israel of a role in poisoning two nuclear scientists in late 2022. Cyber skirmishes escalate: Iranian hackers attempt to infiltrate Israeli power grids and water systems, while Israel allegedly hits Iranian transport infrastructure with cyber attacks (for instance, causing a days-long shutdown of Iran’s gas station network in October 2021, per media reports). Though largely in the shadows, these incidents build pressure toward open conflict.
2023: The Iran-backed Palestinian group Hamas launched an unprecedented terror attack from Gaza into southern Israel, killing around 1,200 Israelis and triggering a war in Gaza. Israel blames Iran for bankrolling and training Hamas, a charge Iran does not hide – Tehran praises the attack and calls for “resistance” against Israel. This Hamas-Israel war serves as a catalyst for broader confrontation: Israel is now at war with an Iranian proxy on its southern flank, and fears mount that Iran’s other proxies (Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Syria/Iraq, Houthis in Yemen) could join in.
Late 2023 – Regional Skirmishes: In the aftermath of October 7, clashes erupt on multiple fronts. Hezbollah in Lebanon trades fire with Israel along the border, and Israel strikes Hezbollah observation posts. In October 2023, Houthi rebels in Yemen fire a barrage of long-range rockets and drones toward Israel, ostensibly “in solidarity” with Gaza, though these are intercepted by U.S. and Israeli defenses. The Houthis also step up attacks on ships in the Red Sea that they perceive as linked to Israel or its allies, threatening global shipping lanes. The United States leads a naval task force to secure the Red Sea (Operation Prosperity Guardian), but Houthi attacks still disrupt one of the world’s busiest maritime corridors. By year’s end, the U.S. and Western navies are actively protecting vessels in the area, illustrating how the Israel–Iran proxy struggle is spilling into international waterways.
Tom Freebairn
Early 2024 – First Direct Israel–Iran Clashes: The covert war bursts into the open. On Feb 14, 2024, explosions rock two major Iranian natural gas pipelines (in Chaharmahal and Khuzestan provinces), causing supply outages across multiple provinces. Iranian officials label it a sabotage attack by Israel.
This is the first known Israeli strike on Iran’s critical energy infrastructure, marking a significant escalation in economic warfare. Weeks later, on 1 April 2024, Israel (reportedly) conducts a missile strike on the Iranian consulate in Damascus, Syria, killing two IRGC generals and 14 others.
More than two commanders were killed:
Tehran’s response comes swiftly. It's called Operation True Promise. Iran launches over 300 missiles and armed drones directly at Israel in early April – the first direct Iranian attack on Israeli territory in decades.
Al Jazeera Staff
Most of these projectiles are intercepted by Israel’s multi-layered air defenses, but the sheer volume is alarming. Israel calls it an act of war. Within days, the Israel Defense Forces carry out their own first-ever overt airstrikes on Iranian soil (April 2024), hitting IRGC facilities – a historic crossing of a red line.
The April 2024 exchanges mark the beginning of open hostilities between Israel and Iran, shattering the longstanding pattern of proxy and deniable attacks.
Mid–Late 2024 – Multi-Front Fighting: Through 2024, Israel engages Iran’s proxies with ferocity, aiming to “reshape the regional balance”. In Gaza, Israel’s military offensive severely degrades Hamas. In Lebanon, after repeated Hezbollah rocket attacks, Israel launches a major operation: Israeli forces strike deep into Lebanon and reportedly assassinate Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, in mid-2024
Israel even mounts an invasion of southern Lebanon in late 2024 to root out Hezbollah strongholds (an operation alluded to in later sources).
The year also sees Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and allied militias directly clashing with Israeli or U.S. forces in Syria and Iraq. Notably, Syria’s longstanding dictator, Bashar al-Assad, an Iranian ally, is toppled in late 2024 amidst internal unrest and the strain of war. Assad’s fall leads the new Syrian regime to distance itself from Iran, depriving Tehran of a key regional partner. By the end of 2024, Iran’s “Axis” is faltering: Hezbollah is greatly weakened, many of its commanders dead and its arsenal depleted; Hamas has lost most of its military infrastructure in Gaza; Syria has flipped to a neutral (if not anti-Iran) stance. Only the Houthis in Yemen and some Iraqi militias remain actively aligned with Iran, though they too have been hit by Israeli airstrikes and show reduced capabilities.
October 2024 – Further Escalation: Despite its setbacks, Iran continues to retaliate. In October 2024, Iran again fires a wave of missiles at Israeli cities (some sources refer to this as a second “Operation True Promise” after the April strikes). Israel responds with its own October 2024 strikes on Iranian targets. That same month, Iran-backed militants in Iraq attempt to hit Israeli-bound targets (including an attack on ships in the Persian Gulf and rockets toward Israel, all largely foiled). The tit-for-tat is intensifying and fears of all-out war grow. The international community’s diplomatic efforts – including secret U.S. backchannel talks with Iran throughout late 2024 – fail to halt the spiral of violence.
Early 2025 – Last Diplomatic Overtures: In March 2025, as conflict rages on low boil, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence publicly assesses that Iran has not decided to build a nuclear bomb and that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei still has not authorized a weapons program (suspended since 2003). This statement by DNI Tulsi Gabbard seems aimed at calming the situation, suggesting there is still time for diplomacy. Indeed, in April 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration announces it will hold talks with Iran in Oman on reining in Iran’s nuclear program. Trump gives Iran a two-month deadline to reach a new deal, aligning roughly with mid-June 2025. As this deadline approaches, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports that Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile has swelled to 409 kg at 60% purity – enough, if further enriched, for ~10 nuclear bombs. Then, just one day before the deadline, the IAEA dramatically finds Iran in non-compliance with its safeguards for the first time in 20 years. In a defiant move, Tehran announces it will build a new enrichment facility (its third) and install advanced centrifuges. Diplomacy is on the verge of collapse. Sensing that Iran is edging toward a “breakout” capability, Israel’s war cabinet begins preparing a decisive strike.
And then on June 12th, some outlets released that Israel is “fully ready” to launch military action against Iran’s nuclear program and then in the early hours of June 13th, Israel launches a massive offensive, code-named Operation Rising Lion, against targets across Iran.
One of the major threats to Israel was the multiple terrorist groups active around Israel under the patronage of Iran. Let us understand these key Iran-aligned proxy groups and their involvement in the conflict. Of course, over the last few years, many have been significantly weakened by Israeli actions, reducing the immediate threat of a multi-front regional war.
Over the last few years, Israel's targeting of the Iranian backed militia, has broken their back. This allowed Israel to launch such a massive strikes as on June 13th.
Before turning its sights on Iran directly, Israel executed a methodical campaign to dismantle Tehran’s regional web of proxies.
This very infrastructure had long insulated Iran from retaliation and projected its influence across the Middle East. In Gaza, Hamas was devastated, with its leadership decapitated and tunnel networks obliterated. In Lebanon, Hezbollah’s military capability was crippled—its arsenal neutralized and its stranglehold over the south broken, aided by an increasingly assertive Lebanese Army.
Meanwhile, Iranian-backed militias in Syria were bombed with precision, cutting off key supply lines and degrading command centers. Even the Houthis in Yemen, who had previously launched missile and drone attacks toward Israel and Saudi Arabia, were struck through coordinated operations with Gulf states. Each flank was systematically neutralized.
With the outer defenses shattered, Israel then launched Operation Rising Lion—a bold and direct strike into Iranian territory itself. No longer shielded by its proxy buffer, Iran stood exposed.
The message was unmistakable: the era of hiding behind armed satellites had ended. Israel didn’t just retaliate—it redrew the battlefield, moving the fight from the shadows of Gaza and Beirut to the heart of Tehran. The flanks were crushed. And now, the center.
An Emergency Action Message (EAM) is a high-priority, encrypted military communication transmitted over the High Frequency Global Communications System (HFGCS). It’s how the U.S. military issues commands to its nuclear triad — land-based ICBMs, strategic bombers, and nuclear submarines.
This is the message sent:
Worse still, we might be looking at a nuclear related message being sent.
Based on temporal and pattern analysis of the classified activity, several interpretations emerge.
Alternatively, the activity might be a component of a large-scale military exercise, potentially similar to STRATCOM's Global Thunder. Such drills are designed to test the functionality and speed of global nuclear communication systems. However, the unusual duration of this event is noteworthy, as exercises of this magnitude typically simulate full-scale war scenarios.
Another possibility is strategic signaling. In a manner reminiscent of Cold War tactics, this activity could serve as a subtle but firm message to Russia, China, and Iran, demonstrating the full synchronization and alertness of U.S. forces.
Finally, in an era of heightened cyber threats, the event could represent a fail-safe or continuity-of-government protocol. This would function as a resilience test for command and control systems against potential cyberattacks, ensuring operational integrity during a crisis.
In a world fraught with rising geopolitical tensions, the issuance of an Emergency Action Message (EAM) signifies a critical shift in the United States' defense posture.
This move is not an isolated event but rather a calculated response to a confluence of escalating international incidents. Each development contributes to a broader narrative of the U.S. transitioning from a stance of strategic patience to one of active global deterrence.
1. Israeli Decapitation Strikes on Iran The situation has been dramatically intensified by reports of massive Israeli airstrikes targeting the highest echelons of Iran's leadership. These are not minor skirmishes; they are precision "decapitation" strikes aimed at crippling Iran's command and control. The targets reportedly include key commanders within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and senior scientists integral to Iran's nuclear program. Such an audacious attack on the state's leadership and strategic assets is a significant escalation, pushing the region to the brink of a wider conflict and compelling the U.S. to signal its readiness to protect its interests and allies.
2. Russian Naval Activity Simultaneously, Russian naval forces have markedly increased their presence in key maritime corridors. A formidable flotilla, likely comprising cruisers, destroyers, and nuclear-powered submarines, is reportedly maneuvering in the North Atlantic, a region vital for transatlantic security. Further south, Russian warships are asserting a more aggressive posture in the Mediterranean Sea. This heightened activity is interpreted as a strategic power play, challenging NATO's naval dominance and potentially aiming to disrupt lines of communication and supply should a broader conflict erupt.
3. Chinese Escalations in the Indo-Pacific In the Indo-Pacific, China has amplified its coercive actions around Taiwan and in the contested waters of the South China Sea. This includes an increase in large-scale military exercises simulating an invasion of Taiwan, coupled with near-daily incursions of People's Liberation Army (PLA) aircraft into Taiwan's Air Defense Identification Zone. Furthermore, China has intensified its use of coast guard and maritime militia vessels to harass and intimidate other claimant nations in the South China Sea. These actions signal Beijing's growing willingness to challenge the established regional order and test American resolve.
4. Evacuation of U.S. Military Families In a clear and unambiguous sign of imminent danger, the U.S. has initiated the evacuation of military families and non-essential personnel from key Middle Eastern locations, including Bahrain—home to the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet—and Iraq. Non-combatant Evacuation Operations (NEOs) are rarely undertaken unless there is a credible and specific threat of attack. This precautionary measure indicates that U.S. intelligence assesses a high probability of retaliatory strikes or widespread regional instability that could endanger American civilians.
5. Repositioning of Patriot Batteries Further underscoring the threat, the Pentagon has confirmed the strategic repositioning of Patriot missile defense batteries throughout its network of bases in the Middle East. These advanced surface-to-air missile systems are being redeployed to protect critical U.S. assets and allied nations from potential ballistic missile, cruise missile, and drone attacks. This defensive realignment is a direct reaction to the heightened threat environment, ensuring that forward-deployed forces are shielded in anticipation of potential hostilities.
Taken together, these five developments paint a stark picture of a world on edge. The convergence of crises across multiple theaters—from the Middle East to Europe and the Indo-Pacific—is compelling the United States to adopt a more assertive and visible defense posture. The era of strategic calm has given way to a necessary mode of active global deterrence.
This Emergency Action Message (EAM) can be interpreted in several ways, each with significant global implications. Primarily, it could serve as a critical dry-run, testing the United States' command and control infrastructure for a scenario where the current regional escalation in the Middle East spirals into a global conflict. This ensures readiness for a worst-case contingency.
Alternatively, the EAM may function as a comprehensive nuclear force posture check. In this capacity, it would validate the communication links and operational readiness of the nation's strategic assets across the globe, ensuring the viability of its nuclear deterrent. A less probable explanation is that this is a routine, long-form drill, though its timing raises serious questions.
Given that this EAM was issued just hours after major Israeli strikes on Iran and the subsequent threats of retaliation, the most likely interpretation is one of deliberate strategic signaling. It is a message wrapped in calculated ambiguity, a classic tool of statecraft designed to convey a clear warning without overt aggression. In essence, the United States is broadcasting a powerful, unspoken message to its adversaries: "We are ready. Do not test us."
The Israel–Iran conflict has triggered a delicate balancing act across the Middle East.
Gulf Arab States (GCC): All six GCC nations—Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Oman have publicly condemned Israel’s June 13 strike on Iran, urging de-escalation. Yet, behind closed doors, strategic coordination with Israel continues. Countries like Saudi Arabia and UAE have quietly aided Israel, , including missile interceptions and intelligence sharing, while maintaining public neutrality to avoid domestic backlash. Riyadh fears that Iran, if provoked, could target Saudi oil infrastructure or block the Strait of Hormuz, prompting it to intensify diplomacy, including outreach to Iran.
Jordan condemned Israel’s strike but actively defended Israeli airspace, downing Iranian threats. Bound by a peace treaty and U.S. alliance, Amman balances public Arab solidarity with covert cooperation.
Lebanon, post-Hezbollah, seeks neutrality. A new government has reasserted control, condemned Israeli action, and is suppressing any rogue provocations from Lebanese soil.
Syria, after the Assad regime’s fall in 2024, has cut ties with Iran and protested Iranian missile flights through its airspace. Damascus aligns more with Arab states seeking stability.
Iraq condemned Israel, but internal divisions are clear. Pro-Iran militias launched minor attacks, but Baghdad is coordinating with the U.S. to restrain escalation, walking a fine line.
Turkey, while vocally opposing Israel and hosting Hamas figures, is attempting to position itself as a regional mediator. Though anti-Israel in rhetoric, it shares concerns over Iranian expansion.
Egypt urged calm and fears regional spillover. It’s securing the Suez Canal and coordinating contingency plans with Israel and the U.S. behind the scenes.
Qatar and Oman, traditional mediators, are pushing for diplomacy. Oman has revived proposals to store Iran’s enriched uranium as a trust-building gesture.
So, what some of the Arab states are saying in the open and what they are doing behind closed doors is very different.
With all this going on, let us first ascertain the spirit of the attacks.
The final trigger for "Operation Rising Lion" in June 2025 was a confluence of intelligence assessments and a perceived closing window of opportunity.
In the months leading up to the attack, Israeli intelligence agencies reportedly accumulated definitive evidence that Iran was not just enriching uranium to near-weapons-grade levels—a fact known since 2023 when inspectors found particles enriched to 83.7% purity—but was actively accelerating the development of a nuclear weapon detonation mechanism. This intelligence, which suggested Iran was approaching the "point of no return," activated all warning systems in Israel.
This assessment obviously created an existential dilemma for Israeli leadership.
From their perspective, a nuclear-armed Iran, led by a regime that openly calls for Israel's destruction, was an intolerable threat.
The timing was also influenced by operational factors. Israeli strikes in October 2024 had degraded Iran's air defense systems, but Tehran was working to replace them.
Israeli planners likely judged that they needed to act before that window of vulnerability closed.
Also, the assumption that Israel would not act before a scheduled round of U.S.-Iran talks in Oman provided a valuable element of surprise.
Faced with what it perceived as an imminent existential threat, a weakened and exposed adversary, and a fleeting operational advantage, Israel's leadership concluded it had been "left with no choice" but to launch a preemptive war.
The Israeli government framed its subsequent military action as an act of anticipatory self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter, arguing that an Iranian nuclear attack was imminent and that June 2025 represented the last window of opportunity to act.
While this legal justification is highly contested and viewed by many legal experts as a violation of international law, it formed the public rationale for the strike.
This war is a watershed in many ways.
The Israel-Iran war of June 2025 has served as a powerful catalyst, compelling regional actors to discard their carefully constructed veils of diplomatic ambiguity.
Faced with a stark choice between a revisionist, destabilizing Iran and a U.S.-backed Israeli-led bloc, the major Arab powers revealed that their strategic priorities are now overwhelmingly dictated by pragmatism, economic ambition, and a desire for stability, rather than by historical ideology or religious solidarity.
In that sense, the ongoing war has become the ultimate proving ground for the Abraham Accords, and they held firm under fire.
Framed initially as diplomatic and economic agreements, these pacts evolved into a de facto security alliance when the stakes rose.
The United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, were the core signatories.
Interestingly, they didn’t just issue statements against Iranian aggression but they acted in Israel's favor as well.
During Iran’s missile attacks in 2024, both countries reportedly provided real-time radar data and tracking intelligence, playing a crucial role in intercepting drones and missiles targeting Israel across Gulf airspace. What was once symbolic has now matured into strategic cooperation under battlefield conditions.
Jordan's role has been even more direct.
Jordanian air defense forces are actively intercepting Iranian drones and missiles that entered or transited its airspace en route to Israel in this ongoing war.
This is especially significant when expressed so publicly because it comes despite domestic political pressures related to the Palestinian issue. We must remember that around 60% of its population is of Palestinian origin.
Ever since Hamas’s murderous assault on Israel on October 7, Jordan has been attempting to manage and curb widespread opposition to Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. Perhaps that is not surprising given that around 60% of Jordan’s population, including the popular Queen Rania, is of Palestinian origin. As in most other Arab countries, pro-Palestinian support has gone further. A recent University of Jordan poll found that 66% of Jordanians actually defend the slaughter and hostage-taking perpetrated by Hamas. (Source: The Jerusalem Post)
With such overt alignment with Israel - and against Palestine by popular logic - the royal family could be at the receiving end of a simmering unrest domestically. In fact, Jordan has viewed the popularity of Hamas as a significant threat to the kingdom.
One may remember the Black September in 1970, where the Pakistan Army's leader, then-Brigadier Zia-ul-Haq (later dictator and President of Pakistan), had massacred 25,000 Palestinians in less than a week on the orders of King Hussein of Jordan.
There are also some social media posts circulating that claim Pakistan's newly appointed Field Marshal Asim Munir, who recently lost a war against India, met with Iran's Major General Mohammad Bagheri and gifted him a wristwatch, which may have been bugged. That may have allowed Israel to locate Bagheri easily.
This picture was taken during Pakistani Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Asim Munir's official visit to Iran in July 2023, not May 2025. He met with Maj. Gen. Bagheri to discuss border security and bilateral defense cooperation. Since social media enthusiasts or anonymous accounts are using a real photo from a past event to lend legitimacy to a false narrative, it appears to be a classic disinformation tactic.
Meanwhile, the Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif made a gaffe that only he is capable of. Enjoy.
Saudi Arabia, the region's heavyweight, is even more cautious. Overtly, Riyadh maintained a posture of official neutrality, issuing statements calling for de-escalation and restraint from all parties.
While it is to position Saudi Arabia as a leader of the Arab and even the entire Muslim world, it also shows a desire to avoid being caught in the direct line of fire.
The actions of the Saudi kingdom are, however, very different. They provided quiet, behind-the-scenes intelligence and surveillance support to the U.S.-led coalition defending against the Iranian attacks in 2024.
So what you see in public and what happens behind the scenes in the Arab world are two different things.
Turkey was more vocal against Israel, of course.
However, one must remember that Turkey's "unmasked" position is not one of ideological alignment with Iran, but one of pragmatic self-preservation. Its criticism of Israel allows it to score points with its domestic base and across the Muslim world, while its calls for de-escalation serve its core national interest of maintaining regional stability and avoiding the conflict's devastating fallout.
Egypt is similar in its approach to Turkey. President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi joined Erdoğan in warning that Israel's "escalatory approach" risked plunging the Middle East into "full-fledged chaos" with "catastrophic repercussions".
Remember, Egypt is the custodian of the Suez Canal. So it values regional stability.
The war between Israel and Iran has torn the veil off the old illusions.
No longer is the Middle East defined by the Arab-Israeli divide. That script is dead.
In its place stands a raw, unfiltered truth: national interest reigns supreme, measured in economic stability, regional security, and survival.
The new geopolitical axis is unmistakable.
The two sides are fighting a power and control battle.
On one side are Israel, the Gulf monarchies, Egypt, and Jordan.
They are not all united not by treaties, but by the shared imperative of regional order, economic integration, and deterrence.
And then there is Iran, rather its regime, which wants its own influence in the region via its proxies. It is obviously armed and defiant, seeking to fracture this coalition and resurrect an empire of influence.
The United States, specifically under President Donald Trump, is torn between its hawkish advisors and the isolationist instincts shaping its post-Afghanistan foreign policy.
So its postures are ambiguous.
While it lost India's alignment quite significantly recently to honestly the most foolish self-profiting instinct of the US President, it has very few allies around the world.
Desh Kapoor
So in this war, it helped Israel with the CENTCOM assets for intercepting Iranian missiles.
However, Washington firmly drew the line at offensive participation.
Behind closed doors, it pressured Israel to limit escalation, urging restraint even as the missiles flew.
The result? A paradoxical posture: America shielded its ally, but refused to lead. This reflects the emerging reality of U.S. power—no longer the world’s unchallenged enforcer, but a selectively engaged superpower juggling retreat and responsibility.
This posture, however, had unintended consequences. By signaling it would defend but not deter, Washington may have unwittingly created the very window Israel needed. Tel Aviv could move decisively, knowing that in the event of overwhelming retaliation, the U.S. would be compelled to step in defensively.
Europe is worse. It cannot take any stand on its own these days. So it is playing peace with both sides.
Russia's reaction is no different. It condemns the Israeli strikes. Quite simply, the war in the Middle East was a strategic windfall! Moscow officially condemned the Israeli strikes as a violation of international law and offered to mediate, but it may be too busy counting its profits.
China is no different.
China’s response to the Israel–Iran war was shaped less by ideology and more by a cold calculus of commerce.
As the world’s largest oil importer and Iran’s biggest energy customer, Beijing’s primary concern was not picking sides, but protecting supply chains.
The war threatened to destabilize the Gulf and jeopardize the Strait of Hormuz, the lifeline for China’s energy security. For Beijing, every missile launched was a risk to refinery output, shipping lanes, and economic continuity.
Regional stability, not strategic allegiance, dictated its stance.
In short, China followed its algorithm: profits over politics, pipelines over posturing.
India is a master of Strategic Equilibrium. So India is using its diplomatic dexterity to follow its foreign policy of "strategic autonomy" or "multi-alignment."
New Delhi has deep and vital interests on all sides of the conflict. It obviously has a strong strategic partnership with Israel, focused on defense, technology, and intelligence sharing. However, it also maintains critical economic and energy ties with the Gulf Arab states, which are home to a diaspora of over 9 million Indians.
As for Iran, it has a long-standing historical relationship with Iran, which is central to its regional connectivity ambitions, most notably through the Chabahar Port project.
India has refused to be drawn into the binary logic of the conflict. It did not take sides. Instead, it may leverage its credibility with all parties to call for de-escalation and a return to diplomacy.
The Narendra Modi government has spent years building independent relationships with Tehran, Tel Aviv, Riyadh, and Abu Dhabi, allowing it to engage with all of them without being seen as beholden to any one of them.
The most immediate and dramatic impact of the war was on global oil prices. In the hours following the initial Israeli strikes, the price of Brent crude, the international benchmark, leaped by over 7%, surging past $78 per barrel.
This spike was not driven by any confirmed disruption to supply but by fear and the rapid pricing-in of a massive geopolitical risk premium.
Market analysts would be modeling the worst-case scenarios already.
It seems that a contained conflict would keep prices elevated, but a wider escalation that damaged oil infrastructure or disrupted shipping could send prices skyrocketing.
At the heart of the conflict lies the Strait of Hormuz—one of the most critical chokepoints in global energy geopolitics. Iran has long asserted control over this narrow waterway, treating it as a pressure valve in its standoff with the West. The stakes couldn’t be higher: over 17 million barrels of oil per day—roughly 17% of global supply—pass through this strait, carried by tankers from Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia. (Source: Analysts see crude at $150 on panic buying if Israel-Iran tensions escalate / Business Standard)
But it’s not just oil. Qatar, Oman, and the UAE collectively operate nearly 98 million tonnes of LNG export capacity, accounting for 18% of the world’s liquefied natural gas supply. Virtually all of it flows through the same strait. Any disruption, by conflict or blockade, could trigger a global energy shock, making control of Hormuz a red line for both regional powers and international markets alike.
While a full closure was deemed unlikely, the threat alone was enough to keep markets on edge. The potential for lesser disruptions, such as attacks on tankers, the laying of mines, or increased insurance premiums for shipping, was a more realistic and potent threat that sustained high-risk premiums and contributed to market volatility.
The masks have dropped. The age of diplomatic theater is over, and the true alignments are now unmistakably clear.
The United States stands as a reluctant hegemon, managing crises from afar—still powerful, but no longer willing to bear the costs of dominance. Russia and China are strategic opportunists, leveraging chaos to pursue economic gain and revisionist ambition, with little regard for the old international order.
The Arab states, once locked in ideological enmity, have become cold-eyed survivalists, forging quiet alliances with former foes to confront the greater danger of Iranian expansion.
And India, poised between East and West, plays the long game—an emerging power weaving its own path through the storm, courting all sides while committing to none.
What emerges is a new Middle East, stripped of pretense. The era of covert hostilities and proxy restraint has ended. In its place: open confrontation, fluid coalitions, and sharpened red lines. The old rules—written in secrecy—have been burned. The new ones are forged in fire, visible to all, and far more volatile.
This is neither peace, nor total war. It is something far more dangerous: a permanent state of tension, where restraint is a luxury, and miscalculation, a trigger.
Explore Drishtikone for expert analysis on global geopolitics, cultural shifts, and Hinduism's role in modern discourse. Stay informed with insightful articles, news, and thought-provoking newsletter.
