This article is incomplete and has not been edited recently, and is considered abandoned. It is to be deleted on July 5 (5 days ago), if work on it does not resume. Please edit it so it becomes un-abandoned. If you feel that this article is ready to be reviewed by a peer reviewer, please add {{review}} to it.
|
This article is incomplete and has not been edited recently, and is considered abandoned. It is to be deleted on July 5 (5 days ago), if work on it does not resume. Please edit it so it becomes un-abandoned. If you feel that this article is ready to be reviewed by a peer reviewer, please add {{review}} to it.
|
July 2, 2025
A leaked United States intelligence assessment has concluded that recent airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities may have delayed the country’s program by only one to two months, according to reports published Wednesday. The preliminary, low-confidence analysis, prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), contradicted public statements by U.S. officials that the strikes had significantly crippled Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
The preliminary assessment by the DIA, first reported by CNN and later confirmed by Reuters and others, concluded that the June 22 U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities set the program back by only one to two months. The classified analysis, based on early satellite imagery, according to Al Jazeera and the Associated Press, contradicted public statements by President Donald Trump and senior officials such as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who described the operation as having “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear capabilities. While Trump told the United Nations Security Council the facilities had been “degraded,” he and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth continued to publicly insist the program had been “buried under a mountain of rubble.” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called the reported DIA assessment “flat-out wrong.”
According to multiple reports citing individuals familiar with the assessment, the strikes collapsed the entrances to two of the targeted facilities and damaged infrastructure, but did not destroy the underground structures. The extent of damage varied by site; Reuters and the Associated Press reported that while entrances were caved in or blocked and surface infrastructure was hit, the underground buildings—such as those at Fordow remained structurally intact. U.S. officials and media reports indicated that Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was likely preserved, with one source telling Reuters it had not been eliminated, and Al Jazeera reporting that the DIA believed the material had been moved before the strikes, limiting the destruction of nuclear stockpiles.
Media reports also suggest that some of Iran’s centrifuges may have remained intact. Reuters reported that, according to The Washington Post, a person familiar with the DIA assessment said some enrichment centrifuges survived the strikes. Al Jazeera likewise cited sources familiar with the report who described the centrifuges as “largely intact.” While the Associated Press did not address potential damage to the centrifuges, it quoted a nuclear expert who said Iran may have moved some of them before the attack, though transporting them without damage would be difficult.
On Tuesday, when questioned by CNN, the chairman emeritus of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Republican Rep. Michael McCaul, has described the damage to the Iranian program as “temporary setback”: “I’ve been briefed on this plan in the past, and it was never meant to completely destroy the nuclear facilities, but rather cause significant damage. But it was always known to be a temporary setback.”
However, as reported by the Associated Press, the agency characterized the report as “low confidence,” acknowledging its conclusions could be mistaken. The Associated Press reported that, according to a statement from the DIA, the assessment was considered preliminary and would be refined as new information became available. The Associated Press further noted that the report’s authors explicitly characterized their findings as “low confidence,” an acknowledgment within the document itself that its conclusions could be mistaken. Reuters quoted a U.S. official familiar with the document who said it contained a number of caveats and described it as including “ifs,” with a more refined version likely to follow. The Associated Press reported that, according to a DIA statement, analysts had not been able to review the sites themselves—an assessment also limited, analysts told Reuters and Al Jazeera, by its reliance on satellite imagery, which may not fully reveal the extent of damage to deeply buried facilities like Fordow.
One official told Reuters that the degree to which Iran can resume operations depends largely on how quickly it can restore damaged utilities such as power and water systems.
Israel’s assessment of the consequences of the strikes on Iran states that the combination of Israeli and US attacks on Iranian nuclear sites delayed the progress of Iran’s nuclear program by at least two years, likely more since Israel has no intention to cease interference with Iranian nuclear program. While Israel earlier claimed that the US’ 30,000-pounds bombs are necessary to significantly damage the uranium enrichment facilities, this report after the US strikes does not show much difference from the earlier, publicly shared before the US strikes, assessment that Iran’s nuclear program had been delayed by Israeli attacks by two years.
Nonetheless, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday “We have removed two immediate existential threats to us – the threat of nuclear annihilation and the threat of annihilation by 20,000 ballistic missiles,” in video remarks published by his office. As Al Hadath from Saudi Arabia reports, quoting an anonymous Israeli source, Israel believes that most of enriched uranium in Iran is buried under the rubble.
Brad Sherman, a Democratic US Congressman and part of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, stated to the BBC: “When they say obliterate the programme, they’re not even saying whether it’s obliterated the centrifuges and the ability to create uranium in the future or whether it is obliterating the stockpile. All indications, including Vice-President Vance’s statement, indicate that we don’t think we got the stockpile,” referencing images which show trucks visiting a facility several days before the bomb strikes.
- Reuters. Trump dismisses reports US is weighing up to $30 billion civilian nuclear deal for Iran — Al Arabiya, June 28, 2025
- US didn’t destroy Iran’s nuclear programme: Here’s what new intel says — Al Jazeera, June 25, 2025
- Michelle L. Price, Mary Clare Jalonick, Stephanie Liechtenstein, Sam McNeil. Early US intelligence report suggests US strikes only set back Iran’s nuclear program by months — Associated Press, June 25, 2025
- Jonathan Landay, Gram Slattery, Idrees Ali, Phil Stewart. US strikes may have set back Iran nuclear program only months, sources say — Reuters, June 24, 2025
- Nadine Yousif. US strikes did not destroy Iran nuclear programme, says Pentagon assessment — BBC News, June 24, 2025
- Natasha Bertrand, Katie Bo Lillis and Zachary Cohen. Exclusive: Early US intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites, sources say — CNN News, June 24, 2025
Category:Donald Trump
Category:Iran
Category:Politics and conflicts
Category:United States
Category:Nuclear weapons
Category:Nuclear technology
Category:Michael.C.Wright (Wikinewsie)
