Local and regional reactions highlighted by the Gulf Cooperation Council and Iran's representatives focused on calls for restraint, expressing alarm at the escalation and urging diplomatic solutions. Various communities — especially in affected Middle Eastern countries — expressed anxiety over further instability, with civilian protection and the risk to critical infrastructure being principal concerns of local leaders and organizations.

Claims regarding the complete destruction of Iran’s nuclear capability remain unverified. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, while visible craters and damaged entrances at nuclear sites were reported, “no one – including the IAEA – is in a position to assess the underground damage” and Iran reported no increase in off-site radiation levels at the affected sites.

Articles in the left category emphasize accusations against the U.S. for violating international law and manipulating non-proliferation treaties, echoing strong condemnation from Russia and China. In contrast, right-leaning articles focus on justifications provided by U.S. and Israeli officials, framing the strikes as necessary for security and depicting Iran’s nuclear ambitions as a direct threat.

Articles from left-leaning outlets emphasize constitutional violations and the lack of congressional authorization, while framing Trump's action as a betrayal of his anti-war promises. Right-leaning sources predominantly frame the strikes as necessary for national security and within presidential authority, with emphasis on deterrence and alignment with U.S. and Israeli interests.

International response has been cautious, with U.S. allies and regional nations expressing concern about escalation and the potential for broader conflict. The strikes prompted regional leaders and the United Nations to call for restraint and renewed dialogue to address nuclear proliferation and security concerns.

Similar U.S. military actions without congressional approval include airstrikes under Presidents Obama, Clinton and Reagan. The 1973 War Powers Resolution aimed to curb this pattern, but executive military interventions have continued, citing urgent threats or national interests. Past unilateral actions often led to debates on presidential power and congressional oversight.

The Al Udeid Air Base is the largest U.S. military facility in the Middle East, established in 1996. Qatar, while allied with the U.S., also maintains diplomatic ties with Iran. This attack follows a long-standing pattern of retaliatory actions in the region, with previous incidents — such as Iran’s response to the killing of Qassem Soleimani — often involving advance warnings to avoid escalation.

Some initial claims suggested that Iranian missiles caused significant damage or casualties at the U.S. base in Qatar. However, both Qatari and U.S. officials, along with multiple news organizations, have confirmed that all missiles were intercepted, no casualties occurred, and there was minimal to no damage, indicating that these claims are unsubstantiated.

The missile exchange highlights the risk of broader regional escalation, impacting global energy markets and international travel. Several Gulf states, including Bahrain, Kuwait and the UAE, closed their airspace in response. Major airlines rerouted flights, and oil prices saw fluctuations, reflecting market anxiety over the stability of critical energy corridors and multinational military cooperation.