Saks said the decision to strike the nuclear facilities had likely been made, in some form, a bit earlier, but it's very difficult to assess because President Trump projected a highly inconsistent image in public communications.

"The key question now is whether that was a deliberate ruse, so the attack would ultimately come as a surprise and therefore be more effective, or whether he truly hesitated. But military capabilities were being concentrated in the Middle East to make this strike even possible, for at least the past week and a half. So at the very least, the posture was in place — if necessary, we will strike. And likely, President Trump saw that since Iran was being very rigid on this issue and had rejected the European foreign ministers' proposal for negotiations, the time had come when further delay was no longer appropriate. The pressure from the U.S. would have likely lost its impact," Saks explained.

In Saks' view, the attack was relatively limited in scope and targeted very precisely at nuclear facilities, but the U.S. made it clear that it can carry out such strikes and that Iran is not capable of defending itself in a way that would prevent them.

"The U.S. now expects Iran to reach some kind of agreement on how to wind down its nuclear program. That, in my view, is what the U.S. is seeking," Saks said.

The fact that no radioactive traces were detected after the attacks does not, according to Saks, mean that the strike was symbolic. He noted that even the damage from the Israeli strikes was significant, and the impact of the U.S. attacks only adds to that.

Saks pointed out that the strike was likely planned in a way that would avoid any nuclear material leakage. "And certainly, the U.S. gave Iran at least some form of warning that such an attack could take place," he said.

Regarding what comes next, Saks said there are several possible scenarios, but he does not see an immediate risk of rapid escalation. The course of events will depend on the tactics Iran chooses in the coming weeks.

Saks does not view Iran's threats to attack French and British ships in the region as particularly strategic. "They can threaten escalation, but no one is going to go to war on Iran's behalf, and that only strengthens the coalition against Iran," he said.

However, it is also difficult to see Iran surrendering. The attacks will certainly hinder its ability to acquire a nuclear weapon. "This is undoubtedly a serious setback. As a result, Iran's ability to influence the world has taken a major hit, and their activities in the Middle East over the past year and a half have been significantly undermined," Saks said.

Still, Iran may not seek an agreement and could become more isolated. "It has the support of China and Russia, who can significantly ease that isolation and help the regime survive. Unless I see real negotiations begin and Iran show a willingness to make concessions, I would expect the current ambiguous situation to persist," said Saks.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook, Bluesky and X and never miss an update!