They struck Iran’s nuclear programme not only in defence of their own countries, but in protection of the free world. Indeed, not since 1940, has so much been owed by so many to so few
June 25, 2025 14:59
“Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.”
Winston Churchill uttered those immortal words in 1940, in praise of the Royal Air Force pilots who defended the island nation against Nazi Germany. Today, they echo once more – not over the skies of Britain, but above Tehran, Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan.
Only now, the “few” are Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Donald J. Trump. And the threat they, and their armed forces and intelligence agencies, helped repel was not the Luftwaffe, but the Islamic Republic of Iran’s relentless march toward a nuclear bomb.
History may yet look back on the Israeli and American strikes as the pivotal moment that stopped arguably the world’s most dangerous regime, Iran, from acquiring the most dangerous weapons on the planet.
Iran wasn’t merely on the brink of nuclear capability – it was sprinting toward it. The International Atomic Energy Agency had confirmed Tehran was enriching uranium to near-weapons grade, and that it was in clear violation of its non-proliferation obligations.
The reality is that, despite the best efforts of the US administration, diplomacy had failed. But unlike previous administrations, President Trump set a deadline of 60 days to reach a deal, knowing the Iranian negotiating habits of slow walking, delaying, dangling and hoodwinking.
Faced with an imminent and existential threat, Israel had no choice but to act – just as Churchill doubtless would have, had Britain faced the same peril. But while the Iranian regime represented an existential threat to Israel, it was also a menace to the United States and the entire free world.
Just as the mullahs chanted "Death to Israel," they simultaneously chanted "Death to America."
Indeed, they had the blood of hundreds of American forces and civilians on their hands, not to mention the casualty toll of US allies in the region and beyond.
They tried to assassinate US officials, including President Trump, while Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps agents operated on American soil, plotted attacks in Europe, launched deadly assaults in Latin America and disrupted international shipping lanes.
As President Trump said in his address to the nation following the US strikes, “Our objective was the destruction of Iran’s nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world’s number one state sponsor of terror.”
Both Trump and Netanyahu were vilified – by the far left, the far right and much of the global diplomatic class. Yet they defied the naysayers. They stared down the appeasers, the enablers and the morally challenged, those unwilling, hesitant or just too frightened to confront the world’s foremost terror regime.
Netanyahu and Trump seized the moment. They led – boldly and decisively.
To be clear: neither sought war. But Iran was at the nuclear precipice. The risk of military action was real. But the risk of inaction, of a nuclear-armed Iran, was far greater.
Today, many in the international community wring their hands, asking whether the strikes “destabilised” the region. But let’s be honest: what destabilises the region hasn't been the absence of a nuclear Iran – it's been the prospect of its arrival. What preserved global security wasn’t a weak and porous accord in Geneva, but the hard power of Israeli fighter jets and American B-2s over Iran.
Too many Western leaders still echo the same naïveté that once led Neville Chamberlain to declare “peace for our time.” Churchill exposed that delusion for what it was when he told Chamberlain: “You were given the choice between war and dishonour. You chose dishonour, and you will have war.”
The Iranian regime is an heir apparent to the Nazis – not only in the infrastructure of death it has single-mindedly pursued, but in its oft-stated genocidal ambitions. The difference, however, is the scale of devastation it could have unleashed with nuclear weapons in their arsenal.
Netanyahu and Trump understood that inaction was not an option. Their courage may well have spared the world from catastrophe.
And now, with a ceasefire brokered by President Trump having been announced, we are reminded that such an outcome was not achieved through weakness or appeasement – but through the projection of power, strength and resolve. The kind of outcome Churchill himself would have saluted.
Ultimately, in striking Iran’s nuclear weapons programme, Netanyahu and Trump made the world a safer place. They did it not only in defence of their own countries, but in protection of the free world. Indeed, not since 1940, has so much been owed by so many to so few.
David Harris is executive vice chair of the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP). Arsen Ostrovsky is a human rights lawyer and CEO of The International Legal Forum
