Why Israel was right to strike Iran last night – And what the world can learn from It

During the night of June 12 to 13, 2025, Israel launched targeted strikes on several strategic sites in Iran, in response to what Tel Aviv described as an “imminent existential threat.” This military operation, prepared in utmost secrecy, focused on Iranian military installations suspected of developing ballistic and nuclear technologies. The action drew mixed reactions across the globe. Yet, in light of the facts, stakes, and broader implications, this Israeli response can be deemed not only justified, but also instructive for the current world order.

Let me be clear: I do not support the domestic policies of Benjamin Netanyahu, nor many of his past strategic decisions. But on this specific action, I believe Israel was right to intervene — and that the international community would be mistaken to swiftly condemn what is, in essence, a case of calculated and responsible self-defense.

1. A case of strategic self-defense

For years, Iran has deployed proxy militias — such as Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in Gaza, and Shia groups in Syria and Iraq — to harass and destabilize Israel. In recent months, Tehran crossed a new threshold by directly supplying long-range missiles and accelerating its nuclear activities. Israeli intelligence detected the advanced planning of coordinated attacks that could have led to massive civilian casualties.

In this context, striking Iran’s military infrastructure before it could be used was not only understandable, but necessary. This is a form of anticipatory self-defense — recognized under customary international law when the threat is clear, immediate, and irreversible.

2. Preventing escalation rather than enduring it

History has shown that waiting for an enemy to strike first can be a tragic miscalculation. By taking the initiative, Israel sent a clear message: it will no longer tolerate the regime’s ambiguous threats and strategic brinkmanship. This operation aimed not to provoke all-out war, but to restore deterrence. The precision of the strikes, their limited scope, and the absence of civilian casualties reflect a conscious effort to contain escalation rather than ignite it.

3. The political courage to act when others hesitate

While many global powers hesitate to confront blatant violations of international law or existential threats, Israel has shown strategic leadership — rooted in the sovereign responsibility to protect its people. Diplomatic silence does not stop centrifuges. By acting, Israel forced the world to confront a moral dilemma: should we continue to turn a blind eye to the military ambitions of a regime that openly calls for the destruction of a UN member state? Or should we, at some point, act?

4. Lessons for the international community

This Israeli raid reminds us of a harsh but necessary truth: peace is not only upheld by treaties, but also by the ability to enforce red lines. Inaction in the face of threats — whether from states or non-state actors — creates a strategic vacuum that authoritarian regimes are quick to exploit.

Western democracies must ask themselves: what happens when principles are proclaimed, but never defended? What the world can learn from this night is that sometimes, clarity and firmness are essential — even if they break with the illusion of endless diplomacy.

Conclusion

Israel acted last night not out of arrogance, but out of necessity. In an increasingly unstable world — where hybrid, asymmetric, and technological threats are multiplying — this operation raises a critical question: are free nations still willing to defend their existence before catastrophe strikes? In this sense, Israel is not giving the world a lesson in war — but a lesson in clarity.