Tue Jul 08 03:00:00 UTC 2025: Okay, here’s a summary of the provided text, followed by a rewrite as a news article suitable for publication:

**Summary:**

This article, written from an Indian perspective, analyzes the recent Israeli airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. It argues that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, facing domestic pressure and a stalled situation in Gaza, instigated the strikes to distract from his problems. The article details the leadup to the attacks, including failed nuclear talks and domestic political challenges for both Netanyahu and Iranian leaders. While the strikes were initially successful with U.S. support, the author questions the long-term consequences, especially regarding regime change in Iran, nuclear proliferation, and future negotiations. The article emphasizes differing perspectives between the U.S. and Israel regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions and concludes by suggesting that the U.S. needs to balance coercion with reassurance in any future dealings with Iran.
**News Article:**

**Israeli Strikes on Iran Spark Regional Instability, Fuel Nuclear Concerns**

**By [Your Name or Staff Writer]**

**TEHRAN/NEW DELHI –** Airstrikes by Israel on Iranian nuclear facilities last month have ignited a powder keg of regional instability and raised serious questions about the future of non-proliferation efforts, according to analysts from India. The attacks, which occurred on June 13th and were later supported by U.S. strikes, targeted key Iranian nuclear sites, including those at Fordow and Natanz.

The move is widely viewed as a strategic maneuver by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who faces mounting domestic pressure over the unresolved conflict in Gaza. Facing domestic challenges since early 2023 over judicial reforms, Netanyahu’s political position was further threatened by a motion in the Knesset.

“Netanyahu masterfully leveraged the ongoing tensions with Iran to divert attention from his domestic woes and solidify his political standing,” noted Rakesh Sood, former diplomat and Distinguished Fellow at the Council For Strategic and Defence Research, writing for _The Hindu_.

The strikes followed a period of stalled negotiations between the U.S. and Iran regarding Iran’s nuclear program. Talks faltered over Iran’s insistence on its right to uranium enrichment under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Despite progress on the idea of a regional nuclear fuel consortium, concerns persisted.

While Israel claims the strikes “obliterated” Iran’s underground sites, doubts linger about the full extent of the damage and the fate of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile. Iran has already responded by terminating IAEA inspector access to its nuclear sites, raising further alarm.

The U.S. involvement in the strikes, authorized by President Trump on June 22nd, marks a significant escalation. However, the long-term implications of this intervention are uncertain. While some in Washington support regime change in Tehran, others fear the consequences of such a move in a nation with a strong sense of nationalism.

“A forced regime change may unleash greater nationalism, which would push the successor to develop nuclear deterrents,” explains Sood. “The U.S. must balance credible threats with reassurance in future negotiations to persuade Iran.”

The article emphasizes the key differences between the U.S. and Israeli positions. While both agree that Iran should not develop a nuclear bomb, Netanyahu seeks to deny Iran any nuclear capability. A deal between the U.S. and Iran could be hard to achieve.

Read More