On June 21, 2025, US President Trump ordered an air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, targeting three core locations: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. This action not only intimidated Iran but also sparked widespread speculation in the international community about America's next strategic move.
Almost at the same time, military activities of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region increased, and Trump frequently made statements about the "North Korea threat," leading to concerns that North Korea might become its next target. For China, these consecutive events directly affect the security pattern and national interests in Northeast Asia and must comprehensively assess and formulate response strategies from the worst-case scenario.
Trump's Action Against Iran
On June 21, 2025, the United States launched a precise air strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. The operation was carried out by B-2 stealth bombers and F-22 Raptor fighters, using weapons capable of penetrating underground facilities.
The targets were the core of Iran's nuclear program—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, which are considered key nodes for Iran's development of nuclear weapons. The US Department of Defense claimed that this operation destroyed the main infrastructure of Iran's nuclear capabilities, and Trump stated in a subsequent statement that this strike would "set back Iran's nuclear program by several years."
In 2018, after withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the United States continuously pressured Iran through economic sanctions and military deterrence. In early 2025, intelligence indicated that Iran accelerated its uranium enrichment activities, with high-enriched uranium reserves approaching weapon-grade levels, which became the direct catalyst for the air strike. At the same time, Israel provided key intelligence support, highlighting the high level of coordination between the US and Israel in containing Iran's nuclear program.
The air strike triggered a divided reaction from the international community. Israel and Saudi Arabia publicly supported the US action, believing it weakened Iran's expansionist capabilities in the Middle East. However, China and Russia strongly condemned it, accusing the US of violating international law and escalating regional tensions. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson stated, "Unilateral military actions do not help solve problems, but will make the Middle East situation more turbulent." Russia proposed that the UN Security Council pass a resolution to call for a ceasefire and resume dialogue, but it failed due to opposition from the US and the UK.
Iran's response further escalated the situation. The day after the air strike, Iran fired multiple ballistic missiles at Israel, causing damage to parts of Tel Aviv. Iran also threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, a global oil transportation lifeline, and the potential disruption led to a 15% increase in oil prices within hours, with Brent crude prices breaking through $80 per barrel. An emergency meeting of the United Nations failed to reach consensus, highlighting the impotence of global governance mechanisms in the face of great power rivalry.
This air strike marked a shift in US foreign policy towards "low-cost, high-reward" military interventions. Unlike the prolonged ground operations of the Iraq War, this precision strike model aims to quickly achieve strategic goals while avoiding prolonged conflicts. The short-term success of this strategy may encourage the US to apply it to other regions, but it also exposes its limitations: Iran's nuclear knowledge and technical capabilities have not been completely eliminated, and reconstruction plans may already be underway secretly.
Additionally, the air strike intensified global factional divisions. Ties between the US and its traditional allies have become closer, while countries such as China and Russia may further strengthen strategic cooperation, forming an adversarial framework. This bipolar trend poses long-term challenges to international security, especially in the field of nuclear non-proliferation, potentially prompting other countries to accelerate their development of nuclear technology for self-defense.
Is Trump Eyeing North Korea?
After the air strike on Iran, the world quickly turned its attention to North Korea. The similarities between the two countries' nuclear programs led people to speculate that Trump might replicate the Iran model on North Korea. Trump has always favored decisive actions, and his "victory" on the Iran issue may have boosted his confidence in similar strategies. Additionally, North Korea has long been regarded by the US as a "rogue state," and its isolated status makes it a potential military target.
Recent military deployments of the US in the Asia-Pacific region have provided grounds for this speculation. In early 2025, the US deployed the "Gray Eagle" unmanned attack aircraft in South Korea, which has both reconnaissance and strike capabilities. Meanwhile, the aircraft carrier "Ronald Reagan" and its strike group appeared in the Sea of Japan, cooperating with US-Japan-South Korea joint military exercises. These actions indicate that the US is strengthening its military preparations against North Korea.
Trump's statements have also added fuel to the speculation. In a speech after the air strike on Iran, he mentioned that "the North Korea threat must be dealt with decisively" and emphasized that "all options are on the table." Although this was not an explicit declaration of war, the tone was similar to the wording before the action against Iran, leading to widespread interpretations.
However, there are essential differences between North Korea and Iran. Iran has not yet possessed nuclear weapons, and its nuclear facilities are mainly focused on the research and development phase, while North Korea already has between 40 to 50 nuclear warheads and has developed delivery systems including intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and submarine-launched missiles. According to a report by the South Korean intelligence agency, North Korea completed the construction of a submarine-launched missile test platform by the end of 2024, enabling it to launch nuclear strikes from the sea.
Therefore, the applicability of military action against North Korea is therefore questioned. North Korea's nuclear arsenal means any attack could trigger a devastating retaliation, especially against densely populated areas like Seoul, South Korea. North Korea has thousands of artillery pieces deployed near the demilitarized zone, capable of causing tens of thousands of casualties within a short period. Moreover, the 2024 Russia-North Korea mutual defense treaty adds complexity, as Russia's potential involvement could escalate the conflict into a great power confrontation.
To date, the US has not taken specific military action against North Korea. On June 27, Trump said he hoped to resolve the North Korea issue through dialogue, but North Korea quickly rejected it, calling the US an "enemy force" and emphasizing the importance of self-reliance and defense construction through the "Rodong Sinmun". North Korea recently announced it would no longer prohibit space technology for military use, implying the possible development of military satellites, further enhancing its strategic deterrent capability.
Experts have differing opinions on this. The International Crisis Group believes the likelihood of the US attacking North Korea is low because "the risks far outweigh the benefits." However, some analysts point out that Trump may seek limited strikes to demonstrate a tough stance while avoiding full-scale war. However, the consequences of such actions are difficult to predict, potentially leading to a North Korean nuclear retaliation or regional instability.
The air strike on Iran demonstrated advances in modern military technology. The combination of B-2 bombers and bunker-busting bombs reflected precision strike capabilities, while the stealth performance of the F-22 ensured the element of surprise. This technological advantage may drive other countries to accelerate the development of similar weapons, especially in the fields of stealth technology and drones. The deployment of the "Gray Eagle" drone in South Korea further indicates that unmanned warfare is becoming a mainstream trend.
North Korea's response showed the threat of the spread of nuclear and missile technology. Its submarine-launched missiles and intercontinental ballistic missile technology partly benefited from cooperation with Russia, reflecting the role of technology transfer in international conflicts. Russian-North Korean military cooperation may prompt more countries to seek external technical support, challenging existing arms control frameworks.
The nuclear programs of Iran and North Korea pose a serious challenge to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). The US's use of force to stop Iran's program may encourage other countries to believe that possessing nuclear weapons is the only effective means of self-defense. North Korea's nuclear capabilities further reinforce this logic, potentially leading to a wave of nuclear proliferation. Countries such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey may initiate nuclear projects in the coming years, intensifying regional arms races.
The Sino-US-Russia Triangle
The unilateral actions of the US on the issues of Iran and North Korea are reshaping great power relations. China and Russia's shared position in the UN Security Council indicates that both sides may deepen their strategic partnership to counter American influence. Strengthened Russian-North Korean cooperation weakens China's traditional dominance in the North Korea issue, placing greater pressure on China in the Northeast Asian situation. This triangular competition may lead to a redistribution of global military forces and increase the risk of conflict.
In the long term, China needs to reassess its role in the North Korea issue. The proximity of North Korea to Russia suggests that China's influence is declining. To maintain regional leadership, China may need to adjust its policy toward North Korea, finding a new balance between economic assistance and security guarantees. At the same time, when the global nuclear non-proliferation system faces a crisis, China can promote the establishment of new arms control mechanisms to consolidate its image as a responsible major power.
Trump's air strike on Iran and his potential focus on North Korea reveal the fragility of the current international situation. The short-term success of the US's "low-cost intervention" strategy may provoke broader military adventures, while North Korea's nuclear capabilities and the Russia-North Korea alliance add uncertainty to the situation.
As a key force in Northeast Asia and globally, China must prepare comprehensive measures based on the worst-case scenario. Through diplomatic mediation, military preparedness, and economic adjustments, China can safeguard its own interests during the crisis and contribute to regional stability. The future situation depends on whether all parties can maintain restraint and resolve conflicts with wisdom rather than letting the world slide into deeper turmoil.
Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7522049475376841250/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by clicking on the [Like/Dislike] buttons below.