In an interview with Al Jazeera, Aslani stated that the first scenario could be a “limited retaliation,” depending on the extent of damage caused by the US strikes.

“While this was an attack on nuclear facilities, more critically, it represents a formal entry by the US into war against Iran — something Tehran has repeatedly warned against,” he noted.

The second scenario, Aslani said, could be a “full-scale war,” where Iran launches coordinated attacks on American and Israeli interests.

“This could include targeting Israeli nuclear facilities and would likely involve Iran’s regional allies, making the conflict far broader in scope.”

Aslani described a third scenario as a “hybrid response”: actions that may appear limited but carry significant strategic consequences.

“Iran has tools of asymmetric pressure—chief among them, the potential to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, a vital artery for global oil supply,” he said, hinting at Tehran’s leverage in the energy sector.

Other regional analysts echoed similar concerns, stating that Iran’s reaction will hinge not only on the material damage inflicted but also on how Tehran interprets the nature of the strike — whether it sees it as a formal declaration of war or a strategic, targeted assault.

With tensions soaring across the Middle East, observers warn that any of these scenarios could trigger a dangerous spiral of escalation, potentially dragging the wider region into prolonged conflict.