Iran accused of 'hiding nuclear weapon ingredients' as Trump's ceasefire remains
The ceasefire deal between Israel and Iran hangs in the balance only hours after it was announced by President Trump - and an expert warned Iran may be hiding 'thousands of nuclear bomb supplies'
Only two hours after President Trump had announced a ceasefire had been struck between Israel and Iran - peace was hanging in the balance. Israel accused Iran of sending missiles - something it denied - and launched counterstrikes, despite the US President urging them not to act.
"Do not drop those bombs. If you do it is a major violation. Bring your pilots home, now," Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, before unleashing a sweary rant about the two countries to reporters.
When asked about reports Iran had broken the ceasefire and Israel's response, Trump said, "I'm not sure they did it intentionally. They couldn't reign people back. I don't like the fact that Israel went out this morning, and I'm going to see if I can stop it. As soon as I get away from you, I'm going to see if I can stop it."
He added: "We have two countries that have fought for so long and so hard that they don't know what the f*** they're doing."
Since then, the ceasefire seems to be tentatively holding. The US waded into the conflict with its own strikes against three of Iran's nuclear facilities: Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordo.
Using 125 US aircraft and so-called 'Bunker Buster' bombs, the attack is said by Trump to have done significant damage to Iran's nuclear capabilities, with the President calling them "obliterated'.
However, a recently leaked intelligence report from the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency has claimed that the strikes have not done anywhere near as much damage as Trump claimed and only set Iran back a few months from developing a nuclear weapon.
An expert speaking to The Telegraph echoed these sentiments, claiming that it is likely Iran had far more supplies to create nuclear weapons hidden away.
"I'm sure they have a hidden place somewhere with some hundreds, if not thousands of centrifuge[s] and they have material all there in several places all over Iran,' said Sara Shine, who previously worked within the Israeli military for three decades, and is reported to be an expert on Iran's nuclear programme.
She added: 'They cannot do anything now, tomorrow, but in the future, they have all the capabilities [to build a bomb]".
Whilst she didn't doubt the US strikes - dubbed Operation Midnight - did serious damage to the three targeted facilities, she believes that further caches will likely exist.
"The [known] sites in themselves, for the time being, are not a lot of threat", the former research director for Mossad was quoted as saying. "The problem is, as you know, the material and the advanced centrifuges that I'm sure they have somewhere".
However, another source said that whilst it was likely the expert was right that further enriched uranium is kept in other places by Iran, the facilities to further enrich it to weapons-grade, or indeed build a weapon had been "significantly damaged".
Iran responded to the US strikes with what has been called a carefully choreographed attack on a US military base in Qatar. Advanced warning was given of the strike, and there were no injuries - with some experts claiming that the restrained measure allowed Iran to save face, but also provided an "off-ramp" for de-escalation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
28 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Keir Starmer to speak to nation after warning 'prepare for war in the UK'
The Prime Minister will take part in meetings at the NATO summit in the Hague. Keir Starmer is to give a press conference today - just a day after a UK Government document warned we must "actively prepare" for war. The Prime Minister will take part in meetings at the NATO summit in the Hague. A National Security Strategy dossier said the years ahead will be a test for the UK and that there will be a need for a WW2 -like spirit in the country. The document said the threat of nuclear weapons will be "more complex than it was even in the Cold War". It went on: "The years ahead will test the United Kingdom... The direction it takes – and the decisions we take – will reverberate through the decades. "We will need agility and courage to succeed, but we should be optimistic. "We remain a resolute country, rich in history, values and in our capabilities. But most of all, there is the determination of the British people themselves. "After all, we do not need to look too far into our history for an example of a whole-of-society effort, motivated by a collective will to keep each other safe. "We can mobilise that spirit again and use it both for our national security and the rebuilding of our country." Labour Defence Secretary John Healey said the Prime Minister trusts that Trump's America would come to the aid of NATO allies. He told Times Radio: "Do I trust President Trump and the US's commitment to Article 5? Yes. "So does our Prime Minister, and he does because in the Oval Office on his visit to the White House, President Trump gave him that commitment in public." Starmer has caused for Israel and Iran to maintain the pause in hostilities. In a conversation with the French and German leaders at on Tuesday, he "reflected on the volatile situation in the Middle East," according to a Downing Street spokeswoman. The leaders agreed that "now was the time for diplomacy and for Iran to come to the negotiating table", the spokeswoman added. It comes as intelligence reports in the US suggested that the American attack on Iran's nuclear programme over the weekend have only set it back by a few months, rather than destroyed it as Donald Trump previously suggested.
Telegraph
30 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Why the Iran nuclear intelligence report is causing such controversy
Early US intelligence assessments appear to have challenged Donald Trump's claim that his bombing campaign 'totally obliterated' Tehran's nuclear weapons programme. The Pentagon's Defence Intelligence Agency, according to sources, suggests the attack had only set back Iran's ability to produce the bomb by a matter of months. The result was a furious reaction by the president and his top officials, accusing the media of pushing fake news. Yet there remains a string of questions that analysts must still answer before firm conclusions can be reached. For example, one of the sources cited by the Washington Post, who was familiar with the initial DIA report, said its conclusions were 'low confidence' in nature. This is spy speak for conclusions drawn from scant or fragmented evidence, or indicating concerns with sourcing. The dossier reportedly said that centrifuges used to enrich uranium that could be used in weapons remained intact. Other findings included that entrances to two of the facilities were sealed off but that underground structures had not been destroyed, and that enriched uranium had been moved to other locations. Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of MI6, said it was too early to make a concrete assessment of damage to facilities buried so far underground. 'Has someone shot their mouth off and I mean, what would they know?' he said. 'Nothing from overhead is going to tell you what the consequences of the attack are because it's deep underground.' Early assessments of damage include analysis of satellite imagery. Commercially available pictures show six deep holes around Fordow, one of the most fortified sites, buried inside a mountain, with debris spread around the site. One source said the assessment also included signals intelligence, based on communications between Iranian officials. Mr Trump referred to intercepts when he spoke with journalists on Thursday morning. 'Two Iranians went down to see it and they called back and they said, 'This place is gone,'' he said. But it could take weeks or months for Iran to conduct its own full damage assessments and for their information to filter into communications channels. Sir Richard, who led the Secret Intelligence Service from 1999 to 2004, said it was unlikely Iran had managed to get people inside the facilities to assess damage 'because of the problems of radiation and leaks'. He said the fact that it had come out in the public domain so rapidly raised another red flag. 'It does sort of politicise the whole thing as well,' he said. 'I mean, it does remind me of some of the stuff around Iraq going way back, and some of those reports that came out, and the arguments about them and the difficulty of sourcing, I just don't think people really know.' Classified briefings for both chambers of Congress had been expected on Tuesday but were cancelled. A Senate briefing is now expected on Thursday, when top members of Mr Trump's national security team will have returned from the Nato summit in the Hague, and one for the House will follow the next day. Chris Coons, a Democratic senator, said the intelligence community needed time to make a detailed assessment. 'This is the key to the question, what's next? If, in fact, there had been a successful destruction of all of Iran's dangerous nuclear enrichment program, I've said that would have been a significant accomplishment,' he told reporters in the Netherlands for the Nato summit. 'But if this pushes Iran and some of its partners to accelerate their enrichment program, it may have created a more dangerous situation in the region. 'The intelligence community needs the time without political interference to assess the impact and to deliver that assessment to Congress and the president.' Officials continued to point out the limited nature of the findings so far. 'This is a preliminary, low-confidence report and will continue to be refined as additional intelligence becomes available. We are working with the appropriate authorities to investigate the unauthorised disclosure of classified information,' said a senior DIA official. The initial Israeli intelligence assessment of the attacks is more optimistic, stating the attacks caused 'very significant' damage. However, Mossad has not yet reached a full conclusion. 'A professional battle damage assessment takes time,' an Israeli official told Axios. 'Israeli intelligence services haven't arrived at any bottom lines for now,' the official added. 'But we don't think there was any bug in the operation, and we have no indications the bunker-buster bombs didn't work. Nobody here is disappointed.'
The Independent
31 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump is driving the Nato agenda - but he may still leave the alliance hanging when it needs the US the most
Many expected this Nato summit to be the most significant since the Cold War ended. And as we enter the final day of the conference, it was clear they were right. With escalating pressure in the Middle East, the looming backdrop of war in Ukraine and an increasingly volatile US president, tensions on the global stage are the highest they have been in recent history. Britain's decision to purchase 12 new F-35A jets - to be formally announced by the prime minister at a press conference today - is a big one. Ministers dubbed it the 'biggest strengthening of the UK's nuclear posture in a generation', primarily because it restores a nuclear role for the RAF for the first time since the Cold War. The aircraft, which the MoD estimates will cost £70-80m per jet, are expected to carry US B61 bombs - the primary thermonuclear gravity bomb in the United States Enduring Stockpile. It is a massive show of force in the face of growing questions over Britain's defensive capabilities. But, notably for Britain to use these tactical weapons, the approval of the US would need to be sought. It's a clear win for Trump: not only is Britain massively ramping up its nuclear capabilities, it is also doing so in a way that gives the White House more influence over it. It comes amid a backdrop of a much wider mission to win over the US president, with Nato countries increasingly bending over backwards to secure the approval of the unpredictable White House. Nato's collective agreement to ramp up defence spending to 5 per cent – doubling its previous target of 2.5 per cent - is yet another example of this. It is a huge jump for a group of nations which are, collectively, fairly strapped for cash (and many of them, such as Spain and Portugal, already fall short of the current target). Meanwhile, world leaders are also throwing all their soft power at winning the approval of the US president. Just yesterday, Trump shared a series of obsequious texts from Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte. 'Mr. President, dear Donald, Congratulations and thank you for your decisive action in Iran, that was truly extraordinary, and something no one else dared to do. It makes us all safer,' Rutte wrote. 'You are flying into another big success in The Hague this evening. It was not easy but we've got them all signed onto 5 per cent! 'Donald, you have driven us to a really, really important moment for America and Europe, and the world. You will achieve something NO American president in decades could get done,' he added. 'Europe is going to pay in a BIG way, as they should, and it will be your win.' Rutte's tactics, while perhaps slightly more embarrassing now they've been revealed to the world, are not dissimilar to Sir Keir Starmer presenting the US president with a handwritten letter from the King offering him an unprecedented second state visit. The incentive to win over the US comes from a clear understanding that Nato cannot properly function without US military muscle, which, alongside Germany, is the biggest contributor to alliance funds. It comes after Trump's repeated threats to pull out of the alliance if it does not properly pull its weight on defence spending. Now that Nato countries are putting real muscle behind their promises to Trump, the question over whether this will result in true commitment from the US president continues to hang over the summit. Just yesterday, the day after Britain committed to reaching the 5 per cent target and Starmer reaffirmed his belief that Trump is a reliable ally, the US president declined to commit to Article 5 - the principle of collective defence and a key pillar of the alliance. While he appeared to recommit to the concept the following day, saying 'we are with them all the way', his ability to shift from one position to another at a time of such global tension raises serious doubts over whether or not Nato's huge increase in its defensive capability will have any real impact when it comes to securing a solid commitment from the US. MoD sources insisted that Britain wants to put itself in a strong position on the world stage because of the broader global situation. The UK wants to be well prepared, they said, so that even if Trump left office tomorrow, the country would still be in a strong position. But, even so, there's no denying that this arms race is being pushed faster and faster by Trump. Rutte was clear: the US president has pushed the West to a very significant moment. Clearly, Trump is driving the agenda at Nato. But as his volatility continues, there is an ever-present risk that the US president leaves the alliance hanging at a time when it needs the US the most.
