Israel's Key Strike on Iran: Congressional Considerations

Key Chapter Title List

1. Israel's Attack on Iran: Congressional Considerations
2. Figure 1: Reported Israeli Key Strikes on Iran
3. Figure 2: Map with Photo of Natanz Enrichment Facility
4. The Trump Administration and Congressional Response
5. Historical Background
6. Iran: Impact and Potential Responses
7. Leadership
8. The Iranian Regime
9. Nuclear Program
10. Military Response
11. Regional and International Reactions
12. Considerations for Congress

Document Introduction

On June 13, 2025, Israel launched a large-scale military operation against Iran, including airstrikes and alleged covert actions. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vowed to continue the attacks, targeting what he described as an existential threat posed by Iran's nuclear program and ballistic missiles. This action quickly triggered a strong reaction from Iran, with its Foreign Minister sending a letter to the United Nations calling it a "declaration of war," and the Supreme Leader vowing that Israel would face a "painful, miserable fate." This report, issued by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) on the day of the event, aims to provide the U.S. Congress with immediate, objective, and professional analysis to address the rapidly escalating regional security crisis.

The report first outlines the immediate developments of the event. Israel's initial attacks were reported to have successfully degraded Iran's air defense systems and some missile bases, struck nuclear facilities across the country, and caused casualties among several senior Iranian military, government officials, and nuclear scientists. Iran reported that the attacks resulted in dozens of civilian deaths and hundreds of injuries. In response, Iran launched 150 missiles toward Israel, some of which caused civilian injuries in Tel Aviv, with U.S. forces assisting in interception. The report visually illustrates the geographic distribution of the alleged key Israeli strike targets and the damage to the Natanz enrichment facility through accompanying figures (Figure 1, Figure 2).

The report then reviews the relevant historical background and immediate political dynamics. Since Netanyahu took office in 2009, Israel has repeatedly threatened military action against Iran's nuclear program, with precedents including the 1981 strike on Iraq and the 2007 strike on Syrian nuclear facilities. After the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was reached, Iran began exceeding the agreement's limits on nuclear activities after 2018. Following the Hamas attack on Israel in 2023, the regional conflict expanded, with direct clashes occurring between Israel and Iran in April and October 2024. The report notes that against the backdrop of Israel seemingly having weakened the Hezbollah missile threat and ostensibly degraded Iran's air defense and missile production capacity, Israeli leadership explored options for striking Iran's nuclear program. Regarding the U.S. government, President Trump favored a diplomatic solution before the operation; Secretary of State Rubio stated at the onset of the attack that the U.S. was "not involved"; Trump later suggested on social media that the attack might force Iran to reach a deal with the U.S., while Iranian state television reported the indefinite suspension of U.S.-Iran negotiations. Reactions among U.S. lawmakers varied, ranging from "understandable and justified" to "shocking and reckless."

The core analytical section of the report focuses on the potential impact on Iran and its possible response pathways. Regarding leadership, Israel appears to have targeted senior levels of Iran's military establishment, potentially including the Chief of Staff, commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its subordinate Aerospace Force and Quds Force, the Supreme Leader's advisor responsible for nuclear negotiations, and several senior nuclear scientists. The impact on the stability of the Iranian regime is twofold: it could galvanize public unity or exacerbate political turmoil. Concerning the nuclear program, the strikes may have damaged some above-ground facilities (e.g., Natanz), but their effectiveness against deeply buried facilities (e.g., Fordow) is questionable. Iran might respond by withdrawing from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) or accelerating nuclear weapons development. Militarily, Iran could employ ballistic missiles to attack Israeli or U.S. regional targets, or even attempt to blockade the Strait of Hormuz, but its ability to coordinate large-scale military operations may be affected by the loss of senior commanders and infrastructure damage.

Regarding international reactions, regional countries such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar, and Iraq, as well as Russia and the People's Republic of China, condemned Israel's attack. The Gulf Cooperation Council stated it violated international law and called on the international community to jointly stop the "aggression."

Finally, the report outlines key considerations for the U.S. Congress, involving the immediate impact of the conflict on the safety of U.S. personnel, regional and global security, and commerce; potential military responses Iran might take against the U.S., Israel, or other partners, and the necessary U.S. authorizations and resources; the long-term impact of Israel's actions on Iran's nuclear program and the possibility of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons; and the influence of this conflict on the regional balance of power, great power competition, and the U.S.'s ability to invest in other global strategic priorities (e.g., the Indo-Pacific, Europe). The report suggests Congress consider actions in areas such as military aid, arms sales, sanctions, defense appropriations, authorizations for the use of force, negotiation agreements, and oversight of executive branch policies to support, oppose, or adjust the government's response strategy.

This report is based on open-source information (such as Haaretz citing non-Israeli open-source intelligence, U.S. media, etc.) and internal U.S. government assessments. Authored by CRS Middle East affairs experts, it provides policymakers with a multi-dimensional, non-partisan professional analytical framework for the early stages of the event based on available information.