How Iran Could Strike Back at US 

By Brendan Cole

A retaliation by Iran against the United States may be more dangerous than its previous response to President Donald Trump’s strikes on nuclear sites last year, a regional expert has said, as analysts gave Newsweek their assessment of Tehran’s next move. 

Trump is considering options to intervene in Iran, where unrest poses the biggest threat in years to its ruling clerics.

Tehran has warned that an American military strike could endanger U.S. military assets throughout the Middle East. 

Tehran targeted Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar on June 23, 2025, to avenge U.S. strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites that month. 

On Wednesday, personnel at the same base, America’s biggest in the region, were advised to leave following Tehran’s latest threats, which, unlike seven months ago, come as the ruling regime faces an existential threat.  

“This situation is very different and is about whether the regime is going to continue to exist in its present form or not,” Rosemary Kelanic, the director of the Middle East Program at think tank Defense Priorities, told Newsweek. 

Kelanic said that seven months ago, Iran had been restrained, but “I'm not sure we would see the same level of restraint if the U.S. attacks the regime with an eye towards toppling the regime—it's just a different level of threat to them."

The U.S. Middle East military footprint includes permanent bases and outposts, as well as access to rotational sites, including joint installations with host nations. 

Jon Hoffman, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, said Tehran would want to signal that American and Israeli attacks inside Iran would not become routine, meaning a great risk of Iran retaliating if the United States proceeded with military action.  

40,000 American Troops at Risk 

“There is a high likelihood that the regime will view the combination of renewed strikes and domestic unrest as an existential threat, resulting in greater retaliation against the United States than before,” Hoffman told Newsweek. 

“This endangers the lives of the roughly 40,000 US troops in the region scattered across more than 63 military bases and other facilities, some of which are scarcely defended, while possibly dragging the United States into a protracted conflict at a time when it is considerably overextended abroad.” 

In addition to hosting around 10,000 American personnel, Al Udeid, about 30 miles from the Qatari capital, has a CENTCOM coordination cell that oversees U.S. forces in the Middle East and Egypt. 

American troops are based in Iraq, at Al Asad Air Base in Anbar province and Erbil Air Base in Iraqi Kurdistan. Bahrain hosts U.S. Naval Forces Central Command and the 5th Fleet, and there is a significant U.S. presence in the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Jordan.  

While Iran is militarily overpowered by Washington’s capabilities, it could still cause costs to the U.S., using allied proxy militias, such as those in Iraq, part of the so-called Axis of Resistance.

 “They could attack US bases in Iraq and Syria pretty easily in a way that is deniable because it wouldn't be Iran per se launching missiles—it would be these local actors that they support," Kelanic said. 

Short and Medium-Range Ballistic Missiles 

Drawing on precedents from retaliatory operations last June, and in January 2020 after Trump ordered the assassination of Iranian general Qasem Soleimani, Tehran is most likely to employ its arsenal of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles against U.S. bases throughout the Gulf region, according to global intelligence and cybersecurity consultancy S-RM. 

Iran's key retaliatory leverage is the disruption of the Strait of Hormuz, which could affect 20 percent of global oil and gas trade, though this would be a last resort, as it could disproportionately affect Iran's own oil trade, S-RM said in an analysis provided to Newsweek.  

“Any direct U.S. military action would almost certainly trigger Iranian retaliation, as the failure to respond would only strengthen a perception of regime weakness at a critical moment when Iran is battling widespread domestic protests,” S-RM said.  

While previous cyber operations, including the 2010 Stuxnet strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, produced limited direct retaliation, the threshold for retaliation might be lower this time due to a recent doctrinal shift, said S-RM. 

On January 6, Iran's Supreme National Defence Council declared that it reserves the right to act preemptively based on "objective signs of threat," which S-RM added showed a potential departure from its reactive defense doctrine. 

Any Iranian retaliation is likely to be calibrated to the scale of a U.S. intervention and a limited American strike would not necessarily trigger a major response,  Ameneh Mehvar, senior analyst, Middle East, for ACLED (Armed Conflict Location & Event Data) told Newsweek. 

The impact of a potential U.S. intervention remains highly unpredictable and could range from cyber operations, additional economic pressure, and communication support for protesters, to limited military strikes and leadership-targeting operations. 

If the U.S. objective were regime change, recent experience suggests that airstrikes or symbolic force are unlikely to produce such an outcome in the short term, Mehvar said.  

“Any strike carries a real risk of escalation: Iranian officials have already warned that an attack would trigger retaliation against Israel, and a regime under acute pressure may respond in unpredictable way.” 

If Tehran were to judge that actions against it had become existential, it could respond by targeting U.S. military assets and regional allies, which could include energy infrastructure in the Gulf, as well as Israel through ballistic missile attacks. 

“Iran could also seek to diversify its response through asymmetric or covert actions against U.S. and Israeli interests abroad, including diplomatic or community targets,” Mehvar said. 

According to an Israeli assessment, Trump has decided to intervene, although the scope and timing of this action remain unclear, an Israeli official told Reuters. 

Brigadier General (Res.) Yossi Kuperwasser, head of the Jerusalem Institute of Strategy and Security (JISS), told Newsweek that Iran will want to show that it is not helpless.  

“As in the past, it may choose a measured response that allows it to save face without sliding into an all-out war," Kuperwasser said.