On June 12, amid the ongoing war in Gaza, the security situation in West Asia was further shaken by Israel surprise airstrikes on multiple Iranian military and nuclear facilities. The attack also killed several key Iranian military leaders and nuclear scientists associated with the country’s nuclear programme. Iran responded with a wave of retaliatory missile strikes on Israel, leading to a volley of missile and drone attacks by both sides. In a dramatic and unprecedented escalation of hostilities, the United States’ B2 bombers and Tomahawk missiles struck the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites in Iran, on June 22, eliciting an Iranian missile strike on the US’ Al Udeid Air Base airbase in Qatar. As the conflict continues to unfold, fears of a spiralling regional war are rife, calling for urgent international diplomacy.

We invited senior experts from the Asia-Pacific to comment on how the events from the Israel-Iran war are being viewed in the region, specifically the Israeli and US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and what consequences these may have on Iran’s nuclear programme as well as ultimately on the upcoming NPT Review Conference in 2026. Tanya Ogilvie-White, Nobumasa Akiyama, C Uday Bhaskar, Tong Zhao and Salma Malik share their views and concerns in this Pulse series on the Israel-Iran war.

Tanya Ogilvie-White

APLN Senior Research Adviser

This decade, we are witnessing the violent destruction of the rules-based order. First came Russia’s unprovoked attack on Ukraine; then, Israel’s horrific war in Gaza. Now, having failed to stop both conflicts, we are faced with Israel’s escalating war on Iran, aided by the brazen US assaults on Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan.

To be clear, Iran has been undermining international security for years, including through its nuclear defiance. But the resort to force to try to halt Tehran’s nuclear ambitions is likely to increase nuclear breakout pressures in Iran and further afield, including here in the Asia-Pacific. It puts the NPT in even greater peril, threatening to push it over a cliff edge.

In response, political leaders around the world must make it clear that unbridled military aggression has no place in our interdependent world. They must strongly condemn the recent attacks on Iran for what they are: illegitimate, irrational actions that will backfire on the NPT and the international order, endangering us all. Most importantly, they must reassert their commitment to the UN Charter and be proactive in pushing for peace.

Otherwise, who will stand up for the international rule of law? And who or what will be next on the chopping block? Taiwan?

Nobumasa Akiyama

APLN Senior Associate Fellow

While many argue the illegality of Israeli use of force, recent Israeli attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities made us revisit the enduring vulnerabilities in the IAEA-centered regime, particularly the grey zones that allow states to operate within the letter – but not the spirit – of the law.

For years, Iran has claimed that its nuclear activities serve peaceful ends. Yet its growing stockpile of 60 percent enriched uranium – far beyond civilian energy needs – alongside its experiments with uranium metal and suspected work on explosive devices, suggest otherwise. These ambiguities have enabled Tehran to tread a perilous legal tightrope, exploiting loopholes in the NPT and IAEA safeguards to extract diplomatic concessions while avoiding formal violation.

The Israeli strike may have temporarily set back Iran’s technical progress, but it has also complicated the strategic calculus. For Iran, the damage could weaken its leverage in future negotiations. It reflects a deeper dysfunction within the nonproliferation regime. The institutional loopholes that permit opaque nuclear activities must be closed, starting with the universal adoption of the Additional Protocol, which strengthens the IAEA’s ability to detect undeclared activities. Without such reform, the system will remain vulnerable to manipulation by states seeking nuclear hedging strategies.

The incident is also likely to inject new tensions into the already fragile NPT discourse. One camp will point to the illegality of Israel’s strike and the hypocrisy of a nuclear-armed state attacking a non-nuclear one. Another will emphasize Iran’s noncompliance with its safeguards obligations and argue that Israel’s actions, however contentious, addressed a mounting proliferation threat. These divisions, sharpened by broader geopolitical rivalries, risk turning the NPT Review Process into another arena for great-power contestation rather than a forum for cooperative restraint.

The Israeli-Iranian episode thus serves as a sobering reminder: as long as grey zones persist, red lines will be crossed, with implications not only for regional stability, but for the future of global nuclear order.

The opinions articulated above represent the views of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Asia-Pacific Leadership Network. APLN’s website is a source of authoritative research and analysis and serves as a platform for debate and discussion among our senior network members, experts, and practitioners, as well as the next generation of policymakers, analysts, and advocates. Comments and responses can be emailed to apln@apln.network.

Image: Oleksii Liskonih, iStock.