Tehran on edge as Trump calls for evacuation, warns of nuclear escalation

U.S. President Donald Trump issued a public call, urging the evacuation of Tehran as hostilities between Israel and Iran entered their sixth day. The American president blamed Iran’s refusal to accept a U.S.-proposed nuclear deal for the escalating crisis, reiterating via Truth Social that “IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON” and adding, “Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!”

The move followed Israel’s expanded aerial bombardment campaign across key Iranian cities, including strikes on Tehran’s Sharan Oil Depot and the Natanz nuclear facility. In parallel, Iranian missile salvos targeted Tel Aviv and other Israeli population centers, prompting air raid sirens and civilian evacuations. At least 224 Iranian civilians and 24 Israelis were reported killed over the course of five days.

President Trump, who left the Group of Seven summit in Canada a day early, was scheduled to convene the National Security Council in Washington. White House sources confirmed the early departure was tied directly to the Middle East conflict. French President Emmanuel Macron stated that Trump’s early return was “a positive signal,” given urgent international efforts to secure a ceasefire.

What triggered this latest confrontation between Israel and Iran and why has it escalated so quickly?

The conflict—widely referred to as the largest direct military clash between Israel and Iran—was catalyzed by Israel’s June 13 launch of “Operation Rising Lion,” a surprise air campaign targeting Iranian nuclear facilities and senior military leadership. Israeli intelligence services reportedly used drone infiltrations and cyberattacks to disable Iran’s early warning systems ahead of the strikes.

Iran retaliated with a barrage of more than 150 ballistic missiles and 100 drones, striking Israeli cities and causing widespread damage. Despite the Iron Dome and David’s Sling systems intercepting many projectiles, Iranian missiles penetrated defenses in several locations. Israel claims that its strikes have significantly damaged Iran’s nuclear capability, including destruction of 15,000 centrifuges at the Natanz facility.

Rafael Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, confirmed that Natanz had suffered “extensive destruction,” though Iran’s heavily fortified Fordow facility appeared to be mostly intact.

How are key diplomatic players responding to Israel’s air campaign and Tehran’s regional appeals?

Iran has requested mediation via Oman, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia, urging them to convince President Trump to press Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for an immediate ceasefire. According to regional sources cited by Reuters, Tehran has signaled willingness to return to nuclear negotiations if hostilities cease.

However, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi posted on X that unless Israel stops its “aggression,” Iranian counterstrikes will continue. The June 15 U.S.-Iran diplomatic meeting in Oman was canceled as Iran declared it could not negotiate “under fire.”

Prime Minister Netanyahu, meanwhile, reaffirmed Israel’s position that eliminating Iran’s nuclear and ballistic threats is non-negotiable. Speaking to reporters, he said, “If this can be achieved in another way—fine. But we gave it a 60-day chance.”

Indirect institutional sentiment suggests that European leaders support de-escalation but are reluctant to criticize Israel publicly due to Iran’s past breaches of uranium enrichment caps.

What are the public reactions and institutional impacts in Iran, Israel, and the United States?

Inside Iran, reports of panic and exodus intensified after Trump’s evacuation warning. Tehran saw traffic gridlocks, fuel hoarding, and emptied supermarkets as tens of thousands attempted to flee north to Alborz and Gilan. Iranian internet services were disrupted and state media downplayed civilian risk. The Red Crescent stated that nearly 100,000 people had moved out of the capital within 48 hours.

In Israel, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich confirmed that nearly 3,000 residents were relocated due to direct missile damage, primarily in central and northern Israel. National security units have been activated to assist emergency services.

In Washington, Trump stated that the conflict “could end quickly” if Iran accepted strict curbs on its nuclear program. A U.S. official confirmed that the president refused to sign the G7’s draft joint statement, which included a clause urging de-escalation and reinforcing that Iran “must never acquire a nuclear weapon.”

Domestic political divides are now visible. Some Congressional Democrats are calling for war powers limitations, while isolationist Republican lawmakers caution against U.S. involvement. National Security Advisor Robert O’Brien has briefed key Senate committees but downplayed the likelihood of direct U.S. intervention.

How are markets, energy security, and global diplomacy responding to the conflict?

Oil prices surged more than 2% in Asian markets on June 17 following Trump’s evacuation appeal. Brent crude breached $91 per barrel and WTI passed $88 as traders feared further attacks on energy infrastructure. Iran’s own state broadcaster was reportedly targeted by Israeli aircraft, and Israel has not ruled out strikes on the Fordow uranium enrichment site in coming days.

The Chinese embassy in Israel issued a public directive for its citizens to leave the country by land routes as airspace remained closed due to the war. Turkey and Russia have condemned Israel’s targeting of Iranian nuclear assets, and UN Secretary-General António Guterres called for immediate restraint, citing radiological risk.

The Gulf states remain cautious but are reportedly working behind the scenes to mediate a ceasefire deal that would involve a temporary halt to Israeli strikes, monitored de-enrichment by Iran, and U.S. concessions on limited sanctions relief.

What is the future outlook and how could this conflict affect regional and global stability?

Strategically, this crisis reveals the maturation of hybrid warfare between Israel and Iran. Israel’s drone-based preemptive sabotage of radar systems, coupled with simultaneous airstrikes, shows an evolution in military doctrine and escalation capacity. Iran’s use of ballistic missiles in dense civilian zones underscores the high risk of urban warfare spiraling out of control.

Expert observers have warned that decapitation efforts—like Israel’s targeting of Iran’s military leadership—could further entrench hardliner sentiment in Tehran, especially among the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, has not been seen in public since the airstrikes began, sparking rumors but no official confirmation from Tehran.

For now, the immediate risk lies in miscalculation. If Israel strikes Fordow or Iranian leadership compounds, or if Iran escalates attacks on Israeli nuclear infrastructure like Dimona, the window for diplomacy may close altogether. Trump continues to insist that a deal “will be signed,” but timelines remain elusive as fighting intensifies.