Middle East crisis Reactions to the Iran conflict

Expert: An expected Iranian strike against the US

Some form of Iranian attack in response to the US bombings was expected. Jan Hallenberg, US expert and professor emeritus at the Swedish National Defence University, tells TT.

The attack on the air base in Qatar may have been more aimed at striking back at the US than escalating the conflict and forcing a counterattack, according to Hallenberg. Even in 2020, when the US killed top general Qassem Soleimani, Iran fired on an American air base and warned beforehand.

Now the US will evaluate the damage and decide whether – and if so how – they should strike back, says Hallenberg.

– If there is significant damage, there will be a counterattack, and if there is less significant damage, they may rest on their laurels a bit.

Analysis: A high stakes game that could lead to escalation

Iran is playing a high stakes game with its attack on the US military base in Qatar, says Sky News' Mark Stone in an analysis. If the Iranian missiles had hit the military base, or killed any Americans, the US response would likely have been forceful.

– On the other hand, if the missiles are shot down, or if the Iranians have fired them in a way that makes it look like a response, but in reality does not cause any damage – then all this may be scaled back, he says.

Initial US data suggests that no missile reached the target, and the US is reporting no casualties. The BBC's Frank Gardner writes that this was "clearly" a calculated response from Iran.

He says that Donald Trump may choose to settle for it, and then sees a path to resumed diplomacy.

"But if he decides to respond to the attacks, a very hot summer could await the Gulf."

SVT's correspondent Samir Abu Eid is on the same track as the two Britons. He says that Iran felt compelled to attack to save its face, but without the US being drawn into the conflict again.

– Because then there is a risk that the regime in Tehran will be overthrown.

Analysis: Trump seems to signal peace in his response

There is nothing in Donald Trump's reaction to Iran's revenge attack that indicates that he intends to escalate the conflict – he seems to signal peace and that the job is done, says Sky News US correspondent James Matthews.

– The whole day the question has been what the US should do, how they should react to the Iranian attack. I think we just got the answer from Trump.

The US has cracked down on the Iranian nuclear program and turned the situation in the Middle East to its advantage – Trump can now once again portray himself as a peace broker, according to Matthews.

The BBC's Bernd Debusmann Jr is more cautious in his analysis, writing that only Trump himself knows whether he is truly a peacemaker.

"This could be an exit ramp for both the US and Iran to avoid further escalation. Or it could be a move to buy time for a more forceful response."

The attack on Iran was Trump's biggest political risk yet, writes DN's Björn af Kleen.

"Perhaps Iran's response gives him a second chance to back down. At least that is the message in the first interpretations from the Trump sphere."