U.S. Strikes Did Not Destroy Iran’s Nuclear Programme, Intelligence Report Says
A newly leaked U.S. intelligence assessment has challenged the narrative that recent American airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities completely obliterated the programme. According to a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report, the strikes—conducted on June 22 under the codename “Operation Midnight Hammer”—merely delayed Iran’s nuclear activities by a few months, not destroyed them outright nymag.com+3apnews.com+3indiatimes.com+3apnews.com+7washingtonpost.com+7indiatimes.com+7.
President Donald Trump and other senior officials initially declared that the bombings had “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s capability to enrich uranium. But the DIA’s preliminary, “low-confidence” assessment suggests otherwise. It found that many key components—centrifuges, stockpiles of enriched uranium, and underground facilities—remained intact or were possibly moved ahead of the bombs timesofindia.indiatimes.com+4washingtonpost.com+4en.wikipedia.org+4.
The strikes targeted three major sites: Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. While the U.S. deployed 14 GBU‑57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator bunker‑buster bombs via B‑2 bombers, and several Tomahawk missiles, many of these sites are buried deep underground—up to 80 m in reinforced concrete—making full destruction difficult ctol.digital+5en.wikipedia.org+5en.wikipedia.org+5.
Discrepancies between the Trump administration’s public statements and internal intelligence quickly emerged. Trump described the strikes as a strategic triumph, even comparing their impact to the Hiroshima bombing forbes.com+8nymag.com+8washingtonpost.com+8. Yet, the DIA labelled the bombing’s impact superficial, saying it only set the programme back “a few months, tops” indiatimes.com+2en.wikipedia.org+2apnews.com+2. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken similarly remarked that the attacks did not destroy Iran’s nuclear infrastructure apnews.com+10middleeastmonitor.com+10en.wikipedia.org+10.
Further intensifying the debate, Israeli intelligence reportedly viewed the damage as “significant,” though Israeli officials were unsettled by the leaked U.S. report that suggested less conclusive outcomes washingtonpost.com+15axios.com+15theguardian.com+15.
Political discord followed. Some Democrats criticized the administration’s moving of classified briefings from Congress after the leak, calling it a “block” on information critical for oversight thedailybeast.com. Meanwhile, Trump dismissed those challenging his version of events as purveyors of “fake news,” reinforcing his portrayal of the operation as a decisive military success nymag.com.
Internationally, observers like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and European leaders—including France’s Emmanuel Macron—pondered the broader implications. The IAEA confirmed that Iran’s uranium stockpiles and centrifuge capabilities remain largely unaffected and emphasized the importance of diplomacy .
Military analysts, including researchers from the Washington Institute and George Washington University, note that Iran has historically been resilient to air campaigns—rebuilding facilities rapidly and dispersing key components to evade destruction iranintl.com.
What Happens Next?
The DIA stresses the strikes are only a temporary setback. To permanently dismantle Iran’s nuclear programme would require sustained intervention—possibly involving new military operations, ongoing covert action, or robust diplomacy washingtonpost.com+1indiatimes.com+1.
Meanwhile, diplomatic signals continue. Iran has paused IAEA cooperation and hinted at accelerating its civilian nuclear programme in response theguardian.com. The U.S. has implied talks may resume soon, potentially without a full treaty — a stance Trump reiterated by suggesting a nuclear deal might not be necessary if Iran’s capabilities remain “obliterated” apnews.com+15politico.com+15theguardian.com+15.
In summary, while the June strikes inflicted noticeable physical damage, evidence now suggests that Iran’s nuclear programme is far from destroyed. It remains capable—though hindered—for now, and could rebound within months in the absence of follow‑through measures. The intelligence leak underscores deep divisions in Washington over military effectiveness, oversight, and the path forward on nuclear diplomacy.
