Recent media reports in the United States have raised significant questions regarding President Donald Trump’s assertion that last month’s military strikes against Iran effectively ‘obliterated’ its nuclear program.
According to intelligence assessments cited by The Washington Post and NBC News, U.S. officials have indicated that only one of the three Iranian nuclear sites targeted during the strikes—the Fordow facility—was destroyed.
An unidentified official commented to The Washington Post, stating, “We definitely can’t say it was obliterated,” reflecting doubts about the actual impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
President Trump has maintained that the strikes were a “spectacular” success, responding vehemently to any suggestions that they fell short of their intended goals regarding Iran’s nuclear program.
Initial intelligence assessments that emerged following the strikes noted that key components of Iran’s nuclear program remained intact, insisting that the U.S. actions would only delay Iran’s nuclear work by several months.
Contradicting these reports, the Pentagon asserted in early July that the strikes had degraded Iranian capabilities by one to two years, highlighting a disparity in the assessments regarding the strikes’ effectiveness.
While significant focus was placed on the Fordow facility—believed to be the most secure due to its location inside a mountain—subsequent reports from NBC News and The Washington Post have suggested that Iran’s other facilities in Natanz and Isfahan also feature deep underground tunnels that may have evaded substantial damage.
U.S. military actions at the Isfahan site, specifically, employed surface strikes rather than massive bunker-busting bombs that could penetrate deeper infrastructure.
A congressional aide familiar with the Pentagon’s intelligence briefings noted that their assessments categorized the underground facilities within Isfahan as “pretty much impenetrable.”
In defense of their claims, the Pentagon reiterated that all three targeted nuclear sites were “completely and totally obliterated,” even as evidence suggested otherwise.
The Israeli government has endorsed the U.S. narrative surrounding the strikes, issuing warnings of further action against Tehran should Iran reactivate its nuclear program.
Iran, for its part, has remained largely silent on the specifics concerning its nuclear sites following the conflict.
Some Iranian officials have acknowledged significant damage from the U.S. and Israeli attacks, but Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei publicly stated that President Trump’s claims exaggerated the impact of the airstrikes.
The precise status of Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile remains unknown despite reports from Iran’s nuclear agency and surrounding states suggesting that there was no sudden increase in radioactivity post-strikes, indicating no immediate contamination from the attacks.
However, Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), did not dismiss the possibility that uranium containers could have been compromised during the offensive.
Grossi noted, “We don’t know where this material could be or if part of it could have been under the attack during those 12 days,” suggesting uncertainties surrounding the current state of Iran’s nuclear material.
He warned that Iran could potentially resume uranium enrichment within a few months.
The conflict itself escalated dramatically on June 13, when Israel launched a coordinated attack against Iran, resulting in the deaths of several prominent military officials and nuclear scientists.
The bombing campaign, which targeted military installations as well as civilian infrastructures and residential areas, claimed numerous civilian lives, reportedly reaching into the hundreds.
Iran promptly retaliated by launching missile strikes against Israel, causing extensive destruction and resulting in at least 29 fatalities.
On June 22, U.S. forces joined Israel in the military campaign, conducting airstrikes targeting Iran’s three nuclear sites.
Iran responded fiercely, launching a missile assault on an air base in Qatar where U.S. troops were stationed.
Initially, President Trump insisted that the Iranian offensive had been neutralized successfully; however, subsequent satellite imagery revealed damage inflicted on the U.S. air base, leading the Pentagon to acknowledge that one Iranian missile had indeed gotten through.
Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell confirmed that one Iranian ballistic missile impacted Al Udeid Air Base on June 23, though defenses managed to intercept the majority of the missiles.
“The impact did minimal damage to equipment and structures on the base. There were no injuries,” he noted.
Following a ceasefire that concluded the 12-day conflict, both the United States and Iran expressed a willingness to engage in diplomatic pursuits to address the nuclear issue, despite no talks materializing as of yet.
Prior to Israel’s military action, discussions between Iran and the U.S. regarding nuclear negotiations were ongoing.
In a turn of events, European officials have recently hinted at restoring ‘snap-back’ sanctions against Iran, in light of the volatile situation stemming from the U.S.’s withdrawal from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) during Trump’s first term.
This deal had seen Iran curtail its nuclear ambitions in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions.
Iran, which resumed uranium enrichment beyond the limits established by the JCPOA following the U.S. withdrawal, emphasized that it was the United States that reneged on the agreement.
In a social media post on Friday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that he had discussions with foreign ministers from the E3 countries—France, the United Kingdom, and Germany—along with the EU’s high representative.
Araghchi urged European nations to abandon their “worn-out policies of threat and pressure,” emphasizing that a new round of negotiations will only commence when the U.S. is prepared to engage in a fair and mutually beneficial nuclear agreement.
image source from：aljazeera
