In mid-June 2025, Israel began a major military operation, targeting Iran’s atomic and military facilities. The attack moved towards a warm back and forth, ending in a ceasefire by former US President Donald Trump. After celebrating that he claimed to have eliminated Iran’s nuclear capability, Trump again strongly advised Israel to refrain from additional strikes.
1. The beginning of the dispute
On June 13, 2025, Israel launched extensive airstrikes at various places in Iran, targeting the houses of Natans, Ferro, and Tabaris airbase as well as high-ranked officials. As a result of the attacks, IRGC Commander Hosain Salute, Head of Armed Forces, General Mohammad Bakeri, and leading scientists were killed.
In response, Iran launched a wave of ballistic missiles and drones in Israel, with the first time that Iranian aerial attacks exclusively enter Israel’s defense. More than 600 Iranians and 28 Israel died.
The cycle of violence expressed apprehension around the world about a possible large -scale regional conflict.
2. Trump’s mediated ceasefire
On June 24, 2025, the conflict pause provided by Trump officially went into effect, although delicate. The two countries said that the other had violated agreements in the early hours.
In a public statement, Trump said:
“Israel is not going to attack Iran. All aircraft will return to their home bases.”
This indicates that Israel stopped the offensive at their direct request.
On 25 June, as the ceasefire remained mostly intact, Trump announced that the US and Iranian officials would resume negotiations next week. Nevertheless, Iran reiterated the desire to quit its atomic ambitions.
3. Trump’s public communications and tactical messaging
Trump began and ended his speech with a serious caution to both Israel and Iran – “calm down now” – but his attitude was particularly to Israel, a long-time ally of the United States.
He called stopping the war a “great honour,” stressing his cooperation in dismantling Iran’s nuclear sites and ending the conflict.
He maintained that the strikes had “dismantled” Iran’s nuclear capability, although this claim was disputed:
A leaked DIA report assessed the impact as a delay of just “a few months.”
IAEA chief Rafael Grossi, the U.N. watchdog, noted that while the damage is likely much greater, underground sites such as Fordow have not been confirmed.
Trump dismissed doubts about the intelligence. He again said:
“The intelligence gathering shows that Iran’s nuclear capabilities have been destroyed.”
He added to Israel’s benefit:
“It is difficult to call for a ceasefire when one side is in the lead.”
4. Responses from local and international communities
Israel reported significant operational successes:
Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that the campaign had “destroyed” Iran’s nuclear program. The military leadership is determined to draw attention to the activities of Gaza and Hamas.
Iran has said it will only respect the ceasefire until then. As long as Israel, and moved quickly to propose legislation to stop cooperation with the IAEA.
Voices from all over the world:
Macron of France called the ceasefire “delicate and unstable” and urged new diplomatic efforts.
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called on both countries to exercise maximum restraint.
Russia warned that attacking Iran’s supreme leader or attempting regime change would open a “Pandora’s box.”
Several countries began recalling diplomats in anticipation of the new surge.
5. Strategies and Implication for future
> A political or social impact?
Trump added flexibility to his ceasefire, leaving open the possibility of renewing nuclear talks, but warned that Iran “needs to make a deal now.
> Will Iran be able to resume its program?
According to U.N. reports major enrichment facilities like Fordow might stay below ground. These reports also suggest that Iran may have pulled out a considerable amount of its uranium stockpile too.
> The risk of renewed conflict
On June 25, Trump acknowledged that the conflict could “quickly resume” if negotiations fail, while acknowledging the instability of the cease-fire.
> The U.S. Engagement
Although Trump refrained from pressuring Israel for a lasting peace, he managed US logistical support and missile defence, while stressing that the United States would refrain from participating in attacks beyond defensive measures.
> The effects of regional
Israel warned Hezbollah and other Iran-allied factions against taking advantage of the ceasefire. Dissident Arab states are expected to advocate for a de-escalation, although some Israelis back claims of self-defence.
6. Implication for future
Diplomatic window: The conversation between the United States and Iran is scheduled to continue next week.
Observe supervisors: IAEA review, once inspectors return, will be important in assessing the impact of ceasefire on Iran’s nuclear readiness.
Emerging stress: The situation can reap again if the ceasefire wears: missiles from Iran, air strikes from Israel, and possible renewed renewed American engagement horizons.
In Conclusion, Trump’s involvement in the ceasefire talks here is contradictory. Initially praising the “destruction” of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, then warning Israel to desist. It exposes a key U.S. stance between diplomacy and deterrence. The stability of the fragile peace depends on the effectiveness of Iran’s ongoing self-control and diplomatic measures.
