&w=3840&q=100)
Calculated or cornered? Iran's dilemma after Trump's strikes
As Iran has vowed retaliation to US airstrikes on its nuclear sites, here are five options with Iran that range from kinetic action against US troops in the region to blocking the Strait of Hormuz and cyberattacks. There is also the possibility of Iran doubling down on the nuclear weapons programme. read more
Iran is bound to respond after US airstrikes on its nuclear facilities over the weekend. Such attacks are expected to be multi-domain and not just military attacks.
The United States on Saturday attacked the Iranian nuclear sites at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan . Even as the extent of the damage is not clear, what is clear is that the United States is now party to the Israel-Iran war and an Iranian retaliation is only a matter of time.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Iranian attacks against the United States are now 'inevitable' and 'will be swift and multi-layered based on the extent of damage caused by the US strikes', Ellie Geranmayeh, the Deputy Head of the Middle East and North Africa at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told Bloomberg.
However, any Iranian retaliation would depend on the kind of escalation it can absorb and what capabilities remain — as Israel has taken down many Iranian missile launchers and weapons storage sites.
Geranmayeh further said, 'Iran knows it cannot win this war, but wants to ensure that the US and Israel also lose.'
Here are the many options that Iran may choose to respond to US strikes.
Iranian retaliatory strikes on US troops
The simplest way to respond would be to attack US interests in West Asia. Iran could do such attacks itself or tell its proxies to do such attacks.
The United States has around 40,000 troops in 20 bases in the region. Major US bases are located in Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
US soldiers in smaller numbers are also deployed in Syria and Iraq and experts say that these soldiers and their bases are the most vulnerable to any strikes.
Iran may mount a calibrated response that may include strikes on US-linked infrastructure but not US troops themselves, Geranmayeh told Bloomberg.
Any Iranian strikes on US soldiers and bases would carry the risk of escalating the conflict, so experts say that Iran could telegraph such strikes so as to minimise the damage and make way for an off-ramp for both sides.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Such a retaliation would be most likely, according to Bloomberg Economics Analyst Dina Esfandiary.
With such a telegraphed retaliation, Iran would tell the United States where and what it will strike with the likely lack of US deaths allowing the Donald Trump administration to have an off-ramp and impress upon Israel that it must stop its attacks, which could effectively leading to a ceasefire for all parties, Bloomberg quoted Esfandiary as saying.
Iranian cyber attacks
Iran has well-known cyberattack capabilities and it is expected deploy them against the United States as part of the broader retaliation.
The capabilities are such that, CyberAv3ngers, a group said to be linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), carries a $10 million reward.
Strait of Hormuz
Iran could block or disrupt the Strait of Hormuz. The consequence will be faced by the entire world and not just the United States and its allies.
The waterway carries around 20 per cent of the world's all oil and gas supplies.
Iran could mine the waterway and attacks ships passing through with boats and missiles. The blockage would mean that petroleum exporting nations dependent on the waterway would find their exports curtailed. Oil and gas prices are set to surge.
If Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz, global oil prices could reach $120 a barrel and US inflation could surge to 5 per cent, according to JPMorgan Chase.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Iranian attacks on oil fields
In a less likely option, Iran may also strike oil fields of oil-producing countries in the region, which are mainly US allies and partners.
In 2019, Yemen's Houthis carried out drone and missile strikes on Saudi Arabia's Abqaiq and Khurais oil facilities and temporarily took down around half of the kingdom's oil production.
Iran may develop nuclear weapon
Beside all these options, the ultimate retaliation may be the development of the nuclear bomb.
Even as the United States struck three Iranian nuclear sites, the extent of the damage is not clear. There are also analyses that US strikes neither destroyed Iranian capabilities to enrich uranium completely nor stockpiles of near-weapons grade level uranium.
With its back to the wall and conventional deterrence eroded, Iran may very well decide to develop a nuclear weapon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
12 minutes ago
- Indian Express
India's trade strategy with China will have to rely on a ‘managed rivalry'
Written by Soumya Bhowmick India's trade relationship with China sits at the intersection of economic necessity and national security anxiety. While bilateral commerce continues to thrive in volume, it remains fundamentally distorted by strategic asymmetries. India's widening trade deficit, its reliance on Chinese technology inputs, and Beijing's growing support for Islamabad have sharpened the dilemma facing Indian policymakers: How to engage economically without compromising sovereignty and security. In response, New Delhi is reimagining its economic diplomacy through a 'China-plus-one' playbook — anchored in diversification, industrial policy, and regional recalibration. Bilateral trade remains substantial between the two countries, but it is significantly imbalanced. In FY2024–25, India's two-way merchandise trade with China reached approximately US$127.7 billion, making China India's second-largest trading partner after the US. However, this came at the cost of a record trade deficit of US$99.2 billion — the highest on record — highlighting deep structural dependencies in India's economy, particularly in the technology and pharmaceutical sectors. In light of these dynamics, Indian policymakers have adopted a cautious approach. Under a policy introduced in 2020, all foreign direct investment (FDI) from China and other countries sharing land borders with India must obtain prior government approval. In April 2025, Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal reiterated that India 'does not intend to encourage' Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) from China. By the end of 2024, Chinese firms accounted for only about 0.37 per cent of India's total FDI inflows. While easing these restrictions in non-sensitive sectors such as solar energy and batteries may be helpful, the prevailing geopolitical climate has stalled such proposals. Instead, India has intensified scrutiny of Chinese technology and infrastructure investments, banned dozens of Chinese apps, and maintained strict regulatory oversight over the telecom and electronics sectors. China's overt support for Pakistan has further deepened Indian scepticism. Beijing's financing and arming of a country India considers a direct security threat has amplified concerns about the strategic costs of deeper economic ties. In response, India has adopted diversification strategies, including strengthening economic partnerships with the United States, Japan, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as well as promoting domestic manufacturing under the 'Make in India' initiative. These measures aim to reduce dependency on any single partner while retaining space for selective engagement with China. This hedging strategy reflects a broader shift in India's foreign economic policy — from passive openness to strategic selectivity. India's answer to the widening trade gap with China is a two-pronged strategy: Build deeper commercial coalitions with trusted partners and turbo-charge domestic manufacturing so that tomorrow's supply chains run through, not around, India. The result is a deliberate 'China-plus-one' realignment that now threads through New Delhi's engagements with Washington, Tokyo, and ASEAN while anchoring at home under the Make in India and Production-Linked Incentive (PLI) drives. This strategy is not just about trade — it is about securing India's place in a reconfigured global production map. Such shifts reflect the growing convergence of commercial logic with strategic alignment. Washington has become India's largest goods-trade partner for the fourth consecutive year, with bilateral merchandise commerce reaching US$131.8 billion in FY 2024-25 — up from barely US$88 billion in 2019 — and resulting in India having a healthy surplus of more than US$41 billion. The new backbone of that relationship is the Initiative on Critical and Emerging Technologies (iCET), which has already green-lighted joint semiconductor, AI, and space projects and prodded both governments to prune export-control frictions. Tokyo complements this pivot by underwriting supply-chain security and industrial upgrading. More than four-fifths of Japanese firms operating in India intend to expand over the next two years, according to JETRO's latest global survey, by far the highest figure among major host economies. At the policy level, the Supply-Chain Resilience Initiative (SCRI), in collaboration with Japan and Australia, has targeted investment in electronics, batteries, and rare-earth processing hubs in India, specifically designed to mitigate single-country dependency. Japan's role is pivotal, not just as an investor, but also as a norm-setter for resilient and transparent value chains. Southeast Asia forms the third pillar. India's two-way goods trade with ASEAN hovers around US$110 billion. Still, both sides have agreed to fast-track a review of the ASEAN-India Trade in Goods Agreement to reduce non-tariff barriers and open services markets. Simultaneously, niche collaborations — such as semiconductor ecosystem talks with Singapore and defence-manufacturing tie-ups with Indonesia — are knitting India into 'China-plus-one' production networks across the region. This eastward economic orientation reinforces India's Indo-Pacific vision and places regional connectivity at its core. External diversification is reinforced at home by the PLI programmes, which now span 14 sectors with approved investments of approximately US$18.7 billion. One headline success is electronics: India has become the world's second-largest mobile phone maker, producing 99 per cent of the handsets sold domestically. Smartphone exports alone surged 55 per cent in FY 2024-25 to US$ 24.1 billion, leap-frogging petroleum and diamonds to become India's single most oversized export item and signalling a decisive shift toward higher-value manufacturing. India's industrial push is not only about import substitution — it is about export-led competitiveness in sunrise sectors. India's evolving economic strategy increasingly hinges on deepening ties with alternative partners across the Indo-Pacific. This pivot is also visible in recalibrating subregional engagement through BIMSTEC (Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation). As SAARC remains paralysed by India–Pakistan tensions, BIMSTEC has emerged as the primary forum for regional cooperation, offering a platform that bypasses Islamabad and aligns with India's Act East policy. At the 6th BIMSTEC Summit in Bangkok in April 2025, member states adopted the Bangkok Vision 2030. They signed new agreements on maritime connectivity and security cooperation, signalling intent to re-anchor the Bay of Bengal as a geoeconomic hub. For India, BIMSTEC complements its external diversification efforts by linking its northeastern states to Southeast Asian economies, spurring regional infrastructure, trade, and logistical corridors that sidestep China. Finally, India's evolving engagement with China reflects a strategy of managed rivalry — balancing selective cooperation with strategic hedging. Rather than decoupling, India is recalibrating its economic and diplomatic posture by diversifying partnerships, securing resilient supply chains, and reducing dependence on China, especially as Beijing deepens ties with Pakistan. This marks a shift from reactive diplomacy to a tactically layered approach, where competition is contained without collapsing ties. The writer is a Fellow and Lead, World Economies and Sustainability at the Centre for New Economic Diplomacy (CNED) at Observer Research Foundation (ORF)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
18 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Trump calls US-Japan car trade unfair, floats keeping 25% tariffs
US President Donald Trump floated the idea of keeping 25 per cent tariffs on Japan's cars as talks between the two nations continued with little more than a week to go before a slew of higher duties are set to kick in if a trade deal isn't reached. 'So we give Japan no cars. They won't take our cars, right? And yet we take millions and millions of their cars into the United States. It's not fair,' Trump said during a Fox News interview that aired Sunday. The comments show that the two sides still remain some distance from an agreement and highlight the risk that Trump may stick with the 25 per cent tariff on autos. The interview came out after another round of talks between Tokyo's top trade negotiator, Ryosei Akazawa, and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Akazawa flew across the world to hold face-to-face talks in Washington, and while they initially met in person, two subsequent discussions took place on the phone. 'Japan-US negotiations are at a critical stage, and we will continue to engage in sincere and earnest discussions,' he said in a post on X. Both sides agreed to continue talks this week after the Trump interview took place on Friday, he added. Auto-related stocks on the Topix were down around 0.4 per cent in Tokyo, early Monday afternoon, compared with a 0.8 per cent gain in the overall index. The duty on the car sector has emerged as one of the key sticking points in the talks. Washington is focusing on its large deficit in the sector while Tokyo is trying to protect a key pillar of its economy. In 2024, Japan's trade surplus with the US stood at ¥8.6 trillion ($59.3 billion). Roughly 82 per cent of the gap was due to Japan's surplus in cars and auto parts. US statistics show that the deficit with Japan is the seventh largest among Washington's individual trading partners. Akazawa has repeatedly said that the US's car tariffs are unacceptable, saying that Japan's auto industry has made an enormous contribution to the US economy through the investment of more than $60 billion and the creation of 2.3 million local jobs. Japan has insisted on keeping the sectoral tariffs on cars and other items included in the talks on the wider country-specific levies that are due to go up on July 9. Akazawa has said he will keep the deadline in mind but won't fixate on it as Tokyo aims to settle all trade disputes with a package that addresses the sectoral tariffs, too. Statements released by the Japanese government over the weekend said Akazawa and Lutnick had 'fruitful' discussions and agreed to continue seeking a deal that is beneficial for both the US and Japan. The statements did not touch on what was discussed or what progress was made. The 25 per cent US tariff is already in place on cars and auto parts, along with a 50 per cent duty on steel and aluminum. The separate across-the-board tariffs, now at 10 per cent, will jump to 24 per cent if no deal is reached in time. Without a breakthrough in the negotiations, Japan's economy could be pushed into a technical recession after it shrank in the first quarter. Trump's statements in the interview gave no impression that Japan was any closer to reaching a deal or winning an extended reprieve on the reciprocal tariffs. Instead, Trump flagged that the US can set its trade terms with Japan unilaterally.
Mint
22 minutes ago
- Mint
Donald Trump calls Elon Musk ‘wonderful', but says row over Big Beautiful tax bill was not ‘appropriate'
Expressing his like for billionaire Elon Musk, Donald Trump in an interview with Fox News, called his a 'wonderful guy', but noted that their very public disagreement on the United States president's marquee 'One Big Beautiful Bill', was not 'appropriate'. This came just before the Tesla chief renewed his criticism of Donald Trump's nearly dollar tax and spending b$3 trillion dollar tax and spending bill, and warned that cutting sops for electric vehicles would have significant negative impact on the EVs and clean energy sectors. Elon Musk's outrage came just before the US Senate on June 28 took up the Bill overnight, and passed it through the first hurdle by a narrow margin of 51-49 votes for debate and consideration. The bill is expected to be complete by June 30 (local US time). When asked about the public spat with Elon Musk, Donald Trump told Fox News that the world's richest man 'got a little bit upset'. 'I haven't spoken to him much, but I think Elon is a wonderful guy, and I know he's going to do well always. But he got a little bit upset, and you know that wasn't appropriate,' Donald Trump said in the interview which aired on June 29. The Senate tax bill seeks to put an end to a popular $7,500 consumer tax credit for EVs, much quicker than the earlier proposal, as per a Bloomberg report. The previous version sought to end the incentive at the end of this year for most EV sales, the new version terminates the credit after September 30, it added. The report noted that tax credits for the purchase of used and commercial EVs would end at the same time. Elon Musk posted on his social media platform X about the bill, which the Senate advanced in a contentious vote late Saturday. He has been at loggerheads with the Trump administration since leaving his posts as chief of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). The bill would destroy millions of US jobs and give 'handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future,' Musk said. The tech billionaire's latest criticism of the package threatens to reawaken his public rift with Donald Trump that began after the world's richest man left his cost-cutting job in the administration. (With inputs from Bloomberg)
