Hubert Odias, Freelance Writer.

As the political conjecture becomes secretive in Iran, one can’t help but wonder what is at stake in the aftermath of the June 2025 war?

The mere mention of Iran implies many things, such as Persia, war and a military power in the Middle East that supports a network of proxies that include the Hezbollah, Kataib Hezbollah, Hamas and Ansar Allah, commonly known as the Houthis.   

Above all, there is also the Iranian peaceful nuclear program to which the United States and Israel are adamantly hostile.  In June 2025, they escalated, and their aggression led to a 12-day war of attrition against Iran.  After all, one may wonder: what’s next and what’s left for Iran?

Since the 1979 Iranian revolution, the West, especially the United States and Israel, has been trying to undermine the Islamic Republic of Iran, which they erroneously label as hostile and a terrorist state with nuclear ambitions.  Therefore, the entire Western Bloc imposed heavy sanctions on Iran.  Then, the June 2025 war came with the sole objective to obliterate all the Iranian nuclear installations and military strategic points in the country. 

In fact, skepticism lingers as to what degree the United States and Israel did the damage, while the efficacy of the strikes still remains unsure.  Indeed, it was a tit-for-tat; Iran, armed with its powerful home-made missiles, wreaked havoc throughout Israel.  It was pretty unprecedented.

Unfortunately, although Iran possesses a vast missile capability, it is not fully prepared to engage in a major war.  Due to sanctions, the country lacks the military sophistication to face Israel and the United States.  Iran doesn’t have state-of-the-art war machines, a strong navy, air defense and 5th-generation fighter jets, without which the enemies easily took complete control over its airspace during the war.

What’s next for Iran, among other things, is to rebuild, modernize, and overhaul its military arsenal.  Based on a confirmed official statement, Iran has purchased and received Chinese J-10C fighter jets and Russian Yak-130 trainer jets.  “Russian MiG-29 fighter jets have arrived in Iran and are stationed in Shiraz, while Sukhoi Su-35 jets are also on the way,” Abolfazl Zohrevand, a member of the national security committee of Iran’s parliament, told Iranian media.

Once the vast country of Iran becomes militarily secure, the question that haunts Iranians is whether they should rebuild their peaceful nuclear program or go nuclear altogether.  It is an issue that has taken momentum in Iran after the war.  In the immediate aftermath, there appears to be more public support in Iran for developing nuclear weapons to deter future attacks.

In this case, Iran would have to make a difficult decision.  Rebuilding its peaceful nuclear program under the watchful eyes of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) would be acceptable, even pleasing to the West.  Such a conciliatory step would relieve Iran of sanctions and isolation.  

In addition, what if, all of a sudden, the Islamic Republic decides to surprise the world by making a 180-degree turn toward the West with an olive branch?  That political move would have opened doors and cleared many obstacles that litter the Iranian paths.

However, Iranian mistrust toward the West could obstruct all the imaginary effort.  Iranians never forgot the events of the 1950s when the Americans and the English plundered their oil resources and overthrew the freely elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh.  The Western support for the Shah while in office and in exile would create another roadblock toward a candid renewal of diplomatic relations.

In contrast, pursuing the nuclear bomb would be like playing with the sword of Damocles.  A lot is still at stake, and two things would probably occur.  If Iran goes nuclear, tensions would escalate to an all-time high with its powerful war enemies.  If the escalation results again in war and nuclear installations get bombed, it will be Hiroshima revisited. 

The consequences would include potential contamination, long-term radiation, exposure and contamination, and release of radioactive material into the environment.  But the West’s worst fear is that nuclear bombs in the Iranians’ hands would galvanize other countries, and the domino effect that ensues would be challenging to contain.  It would be like adding more and more gasoline to a burning fire. 

On the other hand, a nuclear Iran would come with some benefits.  Far from worsening its relations with the West, it would rather neutralize threats and serve as a deterrent against future attacks. It would also elevate Iran into the prestigious league of elite and powerful nations with nuclear bombs.  Israel and others would think twice before planning any hostility. 

Until further notice, the stake for Iran in the aftermath of the war remains unclear except for its militarization.  However, if it chooses to go nuclear, the possibility for proliferation would be “zero to none.”  Iran would rather utilize its atomic status as a leverage for peace and restraint to shift the existing power dynamic in the region and around the world.