Why US bunker-busting bombs are key to Israel's Iran goals
Smoke rises following an Israeli attack in Tehran, Iran, on June 18, 2025. PHOTO: WANA VIA REUTERS
Why US bunker-busting bombs are key to Israel's Iran goals
In launching their military offensive against Iran, Israeli officials have said their goal is to neutralise the country's ability to develop nuclear weapons.
It's widely thought that to truly cripple Iran's capacity to produce fuel for such weapons, Israel would require the help of its chief ally, the US.
That's because the US has something Israel does not: A so-called bunker-busting bomb potentially powerful enough to destroy Iran's most fortified uranium enrichment facility, the Fordow plant.
What's the Fordow plant?
At the heart of Iran's nuclear programme are two main facilities for producing enriched uranium, which can be used to fuel a nuclear bomb when processed to contain a high percentage of uranium-235 isotopes to support a fission chain reaction.
Both facilities, Natanz and Fordow, were designed to have at least some resilience to military attacks.
The biggest site, Natanz, located in the centre of the country, is a mix of assets above and below ground. The subterranean portion was constructed more than 40m beneath the surface with a steel and concrete shell that researchers estimated is 8m thick.
Following Israeli strikes, the International Atomic Energy Agency said that the enrichment hall above ground at Natanz had been destroyed, and that satellite imagery indicated the plant underground had suffered 'direct impacts'.
But Fordow – which lies outside the city of Qom, south of Tehran – hadn't seen significant damage as of June 18, according to IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi.
Fordow is a more heavily fortified site, built into the side of a mountain and believed to be buried about 60m to 90m below the surface. That puts it beyond the reach of Israel's known airborne munitions.
Iran has been enriching uranium to 60 per cent at both Fordow and Natanz, a level of purity the IAEA says is technically indistinguishable from weapons-grade fuel.
What's special about the US bunker-bursting bomb?
The term 'bunker buster' refers to a bomb that's able to penetrate deep into the ground or through heavy fortifications before exploding.
Israel has smaller bunker-busting bombs but not the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, developed by the Americans.
Weighing 30,000 pounds and measuring 6m long, the MOP is the world's largest precision-guided weapon and is explicitly designed to destroy 'weapons of mass destruction located in well protected facilities,' according to a US Air Force fact sheet.
The MOP has never been used in combat before.
It's capable of penetrating as deep as 61m before exploding, according to the Air Force. Parts of Fordow are buried further underground. However, MOPs can be delivered one on top of another, meaning they could drill down even more with each successive blast.
How could the bunker busters be delivered?
Israel would have to rely on the US not just for the bombs but for their delivery. MOPs can only be deployed on the US Air Force's B-2 stealth bomber, which can carry two of them.
The aircraft has a range of 11,000km, which can be extended to 19,000km with a mid-air refueling, according to its manufacturer, Northrop Grumman.
That means one of the planes could be flown all the way from the B-2 operational base, Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, to deliver the MOPs.
Could Israel destroy Fordow without US assistance?
Israeli forces could bomb the entry and exit tunnels to seal off Fordow.
But unless they're willing to maintain a longer-term campaign that includes follow-up strikes, 'efforts to dig down to the facilities to re-establish access and supplies would likely begin almost immediately', Ms Darya Dolzikova and Professor Justin Bronk, senior research fellows at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute, wrote in a commentary.
A riskier approach would be to deploy Israeli forces on the ground with a mission to breach the facility and destroy it from within.
Such an operation would pose significant logistical challenges and would raise the possibility of engagement with well-armed Iranian forces.
Israel, which is widely believed to possess nuclear weapons, could potentially use them to destroy Fordow. However, the use of such arms would be an extraordinary escalation. BLOOMBERG
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AsiaOne
2 hours ago
- AsiaOne
Europeans try to coax Iran back to diplomacy, as Trump considers strikes, World News
GENEVA — European foreign ministers are set to meet their Iranian counterpart on Friday (June 20) aiming to create a pathway back to diplomacy over its contested nuclear programme despite the US actively considering joining Israeli strikes against Iran. Ministers from Britain, France and Germany, known as the E3, as well as the European Union's foreign policy chief spoke to Abbas Araqchi earlier this week and have been coordinating with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. In a rare call they pressed upon Araqchi the need to return to the negotiating table and avoid further escalation. At Iran's suggestion the two sides agreed to meet face-to-face. The talks will be held in Geneva, where an initial accord between Iran and world powers to curb its nuclear programme in return for sanctions lifting was struck in 2013 before a comprehensive deal in 2015. They come after negotiations between Iran and the United States collapsed when Israel launched what it called Operation Rising Lion against Iran's nuclear facilities and ballistic capabilities on June 12. "The Iranians can't sit down with the Americans whereas we can," said a European diplomat. "We will tell them to come back to the table to discuss the nuclear issue before the worst case scenario, while raising our concerns over its ballistic missiles, support to Russia and detention of our citizens." The European powers, who were not part of Iran's nuclear negotiations with the United States, had grown increasingly frustrated by the US negotiating strategy in the talks. They deemed some of the demands unrealistic, while fearing the possibility of a weak initial political framework that would lead to open-ended negotiations. Two diplomats said there were no great expectations for a breakthrough in Geneva, where the European Union's foreign policy chief will also attend. But they said it was vital to engage with Iran because once the war stopped, Iran's nuclear programme would still remain unresolved given that it would be impossible to eradicate the know-how acquired, leaving it potentially able to clandestinely rebuild its programme. An Iranian official said Tehran has always welcomed diplomacy, but urged the E3 to use all available means to pressure Israel to halt its attacks on Iran. "Iran remains committed to diplomacy as the only path to resolving disputes — but diplomacy is under attack," the official said. Prior to Israel's strikes the E3 and US put forward a resolution that was approved by the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a UN watchdog, which declared Iran in breach of its nuclear non-proliferation obligations. As part of last week's IAEA resolution, European officials had said they could refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council later in the summer to add pressure on Iran if there was no progress in the nuclear talks. That would be separate to them reimposing UN sanctions, known as the snapback mechanism, before October 18 when the 2015 accord expires. The Europeans are the only ones who can launch the snapback mechanism, with diplomats saying the three countries had looked to set a final deadline at the end of August to launch it. "Iran has repeatedly stated that triggering snapback will have serious consequences," the Iranian official said. [[nid:719305]]
AsiaOne
2 hours ago
- AsiaOne
US top diplomat Rubio discussed Israel-Iran war with key partners, World News
WASHINGTON — US Secretary of State Marco Rubio met British foreign minister David Lammy on Thursday (June 19) and held separate calls with Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong, French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot and Italian Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani to discuss the war between US ally Israel and its regional rival Iran. Key quotes The US State Department said that Rubio and the foreign ministers agreed that "Iran can never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon." Lammy said the same on X while adding that the situation in the Middle East "remained perilous" and a "window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution." Why it's important The air war between Iran and Israel — which began on June 13 when Israel attacked Iran — has raised alarms in a region that was already on edge since the start of Israel's military assault on Gaza in October 2023. President Donald Trump will decide in the next two weeks whether the US will get involved in the war, the White House said on Thursday. Trump has kept the world guessing on his plans, veering from proposing a swift diplomatic solution to suggesting Washington might join the fighting on Israel's side. The White House said late on Thursday that Trump will take part in a national security meeting on Friday morning. Context Israel, which is the only country in the Middle East widely believed to have nuclear weapons, said it struck Iran to prevent Tehran from developing its own nuclear weapons. Iran, which says its nuclear programme is peaceful, has retaliated with its own strikes on Israel. Iran is a party to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty while Israel is not. Israeli air attacks have killed 639 people in Iran, the Human Rights Activists News Agency says. Israel says at least two dozen Israeli civilians have died in Iranian attacks. The foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany and the European Union were due to meet in Geneva with Iran's foreign minister on Friday to try to de-escalate the conflict. [[nid:719305]]
AsiaOne
2 hours ago
- AsiaOne
How Trump, a self-proclaimed 'peacemaker', embraced Israel's campaign against Iran, World News
WASHINGTON — Roughly one month ago, from the stage at an investment forum in Saudi Arabia, US President Donald Trump issued a warning to Iran that would prove prophetic. "We'll never allow America and its allies to be threatened with terrorism or nuclear attack," Trump told the crowd, sending a message to the leadership in Tehran. "The time is right now for them to choose. Right now. We don't have a lot of time to wait. Things are happening at a very fast pace." That May 13 ultimatum received little attention at the time. But behind the scenes, the president already knew an attack on Iran could be imminent — and that there might be little he could do to stop it, according to two US officials. By mid-May, the Pentagon had begun drawing up detailed contingency plans to aid Israel if it followed through on its long-held ambition to strike Iran's nuclear programme, the officials said. And the US had already diverted thousands of defencive weapons away from war-torn Ukraine toward the Middle East in preparation for potential conflict, according to a Western source familiar with the matter and a Ukrainian source. The Pentagon declined to comment for this story. This account of the weeks and days leading up to Trump's decision to throw his support behind Israel's bombing campaign is based on interviews with over a dozen administration officials, foreign diplomats and Trump confidantes, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss private deliberations. The picture that emerges is that of a long, secretive preparation process and a president who for weeks found himself torn between diplomacy and supporting military action — and was ultimately persuaded in part by an ally whose actions he did not fully control. While Trump has long described himself as a peacemaker — dispatching Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff to the region several times to try to seal a diplomatic accord — he had several trusted political allies pushing him to back an Israeli attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. [[nid:719255]] And US intelligence had indicated a unilateral Israeli strike was possible, even likely, even if Trump wanted to wait, according to two US officials. While it is unclear if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or Trump's more hawkish allies ever got him to a "yes" to Israel's plans, by the days leading up the strike he was at least not a "no," according to two senior US officials and a senior Israeli source. That stance, people familiar with the dynamics said, helped tip Israel into action. Seven days into the Israel-Iran conflict, Trump is left with a dilemma, said Aaron David Miller, a veteran diplomat who has advised six secretaries of state on Middle East policy. He can try again to pursue a diplomatic resolution with Iran, allow Iran and Israel "to fight it out," or he can enter the war with US airstrikes on the deeply buried Fordow enrichment plant, a step that would have unknown consequences for the region. Trump "let it (the Israeli attack) happen," said Miller, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace policy institute. "He got on the tiger and he's riding it." The White House on Thursday said that Trump will make a decision on whether the US will get involved in the conflict in the next two weeks. The White House, the Israeli prime minister's office and Iran's delegation to the United Nations did not respond to a request for comment. Tehran has consistently said its nuclear programme is designed for peaceful purposes only, a conclusion Washington has rejected. The coming storm One of the first hints that Trump might sign off on an Israeli bombing campaign came in April. [[nid:719299]] During a closed-door meeting on April 17, Saudi Arabia's defence minister delivered a blunt message to Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian: Take Trump's offer to negotiate an agreement seriously because it presents a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel. Reuters could not determine whether the message was sent at Washington's behest, nor whether Iran's leaders took that message seriously. With hindsight, they should have. The Israel Defence Forces and the head of US Central Command, General Michael "Erik" Kurilla, were discussing detailed intelligence about Iran's missile buildup and nuclear programme and steps that could be required to defend US troops and Israel itself in any conflict with Iran, according to a US official and senior Israeli official. Meanwhile, the US was funnelling weapons to Israel that would be useful for an air war with Iran. In one instance in early May, a large shipment of defencive missiles originally meant for Ukraine was diverted to Israel instead, according to the Western source and the Ukrainian source. The diverted shipment caused consternation in Kyiv and sparked continued fears that additional weapons needed to defend against Moscow will instead be used to defend US interests elsewhere, the Ukrainian source said. In the opening months of Trump's term, Israel had already proposed to Washington a series of options to attack Iran's facilities, according to sources. While Trump had rebuffed those ideas, saying he preferred diplomacy for the time being, several people close to him said he was never dead-set against using military force against Iran. [[nid:719288]] He had done so before. In 2020, despite a foreign policy during his first term that was otherwise marked by restraint, Trump ordered a drone strike that killed major general Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' division responsible for its international operations. The Iranian government has since sought to murder Trump in revenge, US prosecutors have said, an allegation Tehran denies. Behind the scenes, Trump had been pulled in multiple directions on the Iran issue since before he even took office. On one side, many supporters - including conservative media personality Tucker Carlson - and administration officials saw Trump's Make America Great Again movement as an antidote to decades of foreign wars that cost thousands of American lives without significantly advancing American interests. On the other, several close Trump allies - from conservative commentator Mark Levin to Republican Senator Lindsey Graham - were portraying a nuclear Iran as an existential threat that must be removed at any cost. Trump himself took pride in being a broker of peace. "My proudest legacy," he said during his inauguration address, "will be that of a peacemaker and unifier." "It's a tango" Ultimately, no US official, Trump confidante or diplomat Reuters talked to identified an epiphany that tipped the scales for the president. One senior administration official said that after months of sitting on the fence a lack of diplomatic progress, a push from the Israelis and appeals by hawkish allies likely wore him down. Trump aides and allies have noted that Israel's attack unfolded just after the expiry of a 60-day deadline the Trump administration had set for a diplomatic breakthrough with Iran. The senior US official said another dynamic was at play: As US intelligence consistently showed Israel might go ahead with an attack with or without US support, the administration could look caught off guard if they did not get behind it. Worse, it could appear that the US was opposing a longtime ally. Although Trump had appeared to some to snub Netanyahu as he pushed for a peaceful solution to the crisis, privately, Israel understood that Washington would stand by it, said a separate official. By the time Trump talked to Netanyahu on Monday, June 9 — one of many phone calls in recent days — his stance was one of tacit, if not explicit approval, according to one US and one Israeli official. The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump had said he would like more time to see diplomacy play out. But the US official said that he did not explicitly veto Israel's plans. By Wednesday, June 11, it was clear to Washington that Israel's plans were a go. That day, Reuters reported that the US was preparing a partial evacuation of its Iraqi embassy amid fears of reprisals from Iran following an imminent attack. The next day, June 12, Washington sent a formal diplomatic note to several regional allies, warning them that an attack was imminent. That evening, Israel launched its overnight barrage, an attack that almost immediately escalated into an air war. Trump and some key cabinet members watched the events live from the wood-paneled "JFK room," part of the White House Situation Room. Other officials watched the events nearby. On the menu, per one official: stone crabs from a local restaurant. The initial attack appeared to be a success, with several close advisers to Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei killed and key nuclear sites seriously damaged. Over the weekend, the Israelis considered killing Khamenei himself, but were waved off by Trump, according to two US officials. Almost immediately, a political civil war erupted in Trump's Republican Party, with several high-profile conservatives, including members of Congress, accusing his administration of fanning the flames of war. Seven days on, the US intelligence community believes the strikes have set Iran's nuclear ambitions back by only months, according to a source familiar with US intelligence reports, confirming a CNN report. A significant blow to Iran's nuclear ambitions, most analysts say, will require dropping bunker-busting bombs on the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, the crown jewel of Iran's nuclear programme. Only the US has that capability. Trump has said he is considering such a strike, which would represent a major escalation for the United States. As of Thursday, his intentions were still unclear. [[nid:719286]]
