
Trump and Hegseth admit doubts over Iran's nuclear sites damage by US strikes
Donald Trump and the US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, have admitted to some doubt over the scale of the damage inflicted on Iran's nuclear sites by the US bombing at the weekend, after a leaked Pentagon assessment said the Iranian programme had been set back by only a few months.
'The intelligence was very inconclusive,' Trump told journalists at a Nato summit in The Hague, introducing an element of uncertainty for the first time after several days of emphatic declarations that the destruction had been total. 'The intelligence says we don't know. It could've been very severe. That's what the intelligence suggests.'
The president then appeared to revert to his claim that 'it was very severe. There was obliteration'.
Trump also likened the US use of massive bunker-buster bombs on the Fordow and Natanz uranium enrichment sites to the impact of the US nuclear weapons dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the second world war, using the comparison specifically in reference to their impact in ending a conflict.
Accompanying Trump to the summit, Hegseth also seemed to downgrade his earlier declaration that Iran's ability to make nuclear weapons in the future had been 'obliterated'.
On Wednesday the defence secretary described the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities by US and Israeli bombing as 'moderate to severe'. He pledged there would be an FBI investigation of Pentagon leaks, but also claimed the leaked information was 'false'.
Meanwhile the Israeli military said it was still trying to assess the damage inflicted by the bombing campaign, but a senior officer insisted 'we pushed them years backward'.
On Tuesday night CNN reported on a leaked Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) initial assessment which tentatively concluded that the deeply buried Fordow site and the underground facilities at Natanz had not been destroyed, and key components of the nuclear programme, including centrifuges, were capable of being restarted within months.
The CNN account on the leak was independently confirmed as accurate by the Guardian and multiple other outlets. The Washington Post noted that it was categorised as 'low confidence', though a source told the Guardian that further analysis could find even less damage that the initial DIA estimate.
The DIA assessment also found that much of Iran's stockpile of highly enriched uranium, which would provide the fuel for making any future nuclear warhead, had been moved before the strikes and may have been moved to other secret nuclear sites maintained by Iran.
For several years, a new facility has been excavated under a mountain, just to the south of the original Natanz facility.
Providing an Israeli perspective on Wednesday, IDF spokesperson Brig Gen Effie Defrin said the results of the air force's bombing sorties had been 'even better than we expected'.
'I can say right now that the estimate is that we struck a significant blow to [Iran's] nuclear infrastructure,' Defrin said. 'I can say that we pushed them years backward.'
CNN reported that Israeli intelligence estimates of the setback inflicted on Iran's nuclear aspirations was two years.
While assessments differed on the damage inflicted on underground facilities at Fordow and Natanz, there appeared to be general acceptance that Iran's 400kg stock of 60% enriched uranium had gone missing, and was no longer being monitored by the UN watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Nuclear experts described the development as a potential disaster for nonproliferation efforts, and warned of the dangers of Iran deciding to eject the remaining IAEA inspectors in the country and leave the 1968 nuclear non-proliferation treaty (NPT), which obliges Iran and other non-nuclear weapon countries, to refrain from any efforts to make a bomb, and to undergo monitoring and verification.
Iran's parliament is preparing a bill clearing the way for a departure from the NPT.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
32 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's pointless globetrotting proves how irrelevant he is
Sir Keir Starmer clearly finds burnishing his credentials as a statesman on the world stage far more to his liking than dealing with pesky domestic concerns, such as cutting disability benefits and the winter fuel allowance. British prime ministers usually seek solace in endless overseas jamborees once they have first served a lengthy apprenticeship in Downing Street. Tony Blair was well into his third term before taking refuge in foreign junkets as his domestic popularity waned. By contrast, Starmer, who now has the unenviable honour of the lowest net favourability rating on record, has developed the taste for travelling abroad remarkably early in his premiership. Rather than investing effort in rallying support for policies, 'Never-Here Keir' prefers to spend his time hobnobbing with other world leaders. Last week our Prime Minister was missing in action, attending the increasingly irrelevant meeting of G7 leaders in Canada. It was memorable solely for Donald Trump's sensible decision to head for the exit early to attend to the deepening Iran-Israel conflict. Starmer was in The Hague attending the annual get-together of Nato leaders, where he desperately sought to persuade an increasingly sceptical Trump administration that his Government really was committed to spending 5 per cent of GDP on defence by 2035. By that date, Starmer's undistinguished term in office will be a distant memory. And the defence of the realm will not have been improved a jot by the investment in rural broadband and national roadworks that Starmer now claims is a vital part of his plan to increase overall defence spending. A more detailed examination of the Government's defence plans – one that our allies in the Pentagon will be studying closely – is that there will be no new money to increase the number of troops available to fight the wars of the future. Starmer's boast at the Nato summit that the UK would meet the alliance's new spending target of 5 per cent of GDP 'to deepen our commitment to Nato' is nothing more than an elaborate Treasury 'smoke and mirrors' exercise. Even the highly publicised decision to buy 12 F-35A stealth fighters, which can carry tactical nuclear weapons, has been taken at the expense of buying more of the F-35B variant used by the Royal Navy's two 65,000-ton aircraft carriers, thereby severely diminishing their war-fighting capabilities. Nor does Starmer's endless globetrotting appear to have had any noticeable bearing on his ability to influence key events, as was evident during the Trump administration's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. While Starmer has an unerring habit of making sure he is photographed next to Trump whenever there is a summit photo op, his ability to bring any influence to bear on the Trump administration's decision-making process is negligible. The first Starmer knew that Trump had given the go-ahead for the bombing raid was when he received a telephone call from the US leader at Chequers, after the B-2 stealth bombers were already in the air. It was merely a courtesy call from Trump, not a consultation with a key ally. The fact that Starmer was completely blindsided by Trump's decision to attack Iran is hardly surprising given that David Lammy, his hapless Foreign Secretary, had returned from meeting Trump administration officials earlier that week insisting there was still a 'window of opportunity' to de-escalate the conflict. The bitter truth is that, for all Starmer attempts to ingratiate himself with world leaders, no one is taking him seriously as a statesman. And this is no wonder given his default response when faced with an international crisis is to indulge in legalistic sophistry and equivocation. Starmer's inability to formulate a clear and coherent response when faced with a global crisis was clearly evident from his handling of the Gaza conflict, when he supported Israel's right to defend itself while at the same time backing the imposition of punitive measures against key members of the Israeli government. The prime minister's leadership failings were again in evidence in the aftermath of the US raid on Iran's infrastructure. While insisting that the UK remained opposed to the ayatollahs acquiring nuclear weapons, Starmer could not bring himself to issue a public declaration of support for Trump's decisive action, which has destroyed any hope the Iranians may have entertained of developing nuclear warheads in the near future. The result is that, for all Starmer's grandstanding at global summits, no one is going to take a politician seriously who is quite content to deceive the outside world about the UK's defence commitments, while at the same time being temperamentally incapable of making his mind up on international issues. Starmer may like to project the image of a global statesman, but the brutal truth is that few world leaders, least of all in Washington, have much interest in hearing the views – or lack of them – of Starmer and his Government.


Telegraph
32 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘Iran-linked' group backs Palestine Action
An Iran-linked group has backed Palestine Action's violent protest campaign against Israeli targets despite the group's proscription as a terrorist organisation. The Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC) has been described as an 'Islamist group ideologically aligned with the Iranian regime' that has a history of 'extremist links and terrorist sympathies' in a Government review of the counter-terror Prevent programme. In social media posts and at events over the past 10 months, the IHRC in north London has campaigned in support of 10 Palestine Action activists charged with criminal damage, violent disorder and aggravated burglary after a protest at a factory belonging to Israeli arms company Elbit Systems in Bristol last August. The so-called 'Filton 10' were initially arrested under the Terrorism Act, which meant they could be held for 14 days without charge. None were charged with terrorism offences but the Crown Prosecution Service said there was a 'terrorism connection'. The break-in was cited by Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, on Monday as she announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation after the group damaged two military plans at RAF Brize Norton at a potential cost of millions of pounds. However, in its response to the proscription, the IHRC said it stood by Palestine Action, saying: 'We are all part of the resistance! We are all Palestine Action!' If posted after the official designation as a terror group, the statements could be a criminal offence. The ban has meant that any members of Palestine Action or anyone who supports it could face up to 14 years in prison. The order banning the group will be laid in Parliament on Monday and is expected to become law on July 4. The IHRC, which is funded by a registered charity, said that if Ms Cooper proscribed Palestine Action, 'it will not only be the latest outcome of unchecked political and legal Islamophobia in the UK but another nail in the coffin of the British legal system'. There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing by the IHRC, which has said it has consistently supported the right to protest and civil resistance, particularly by holding governments and companies accountable for 'their roles in enabling human rights abuses, such as the genocide taking place in Gaza.' It said it has 'no institutional or financial link' with the Iranian government, and that allegations suggesting otherwise were 'baseless.' However, Lord Walney, the former Government adviser on political violence, said: 'It is outrageous that a body with a registered charitable arm is proclaiming itself 'part of the resistance' in support of a group about to be proscribed under terrorism law. 'The IHRC has spoken up for Palestine Action time and again while claiming to be a legitimate charity. 'Ministers must wake up to the links between supporters of the Iranian regime and Palestine Action's long campaign of criminal damage inflicted on the UK defence industry.' Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said he condemned the IHRC for supporting Palestine Action, which has used 'violence, intimidation and criminal damage' to try to achieve its political aims. 'The IHRC and the MPs who support [Palestine Action's] violent methods are advocating mob rule and should hang their heads in shame,' he said. 'Just because you disagree with someone doesn't give you the right to smash up their property. Mob rule has no place in a civilised country. 'The IHRC Trust is, in essence, the same organisation as the IHRC and has charitable status. I call on the Charity Commission to urgently revoke their charitable status – no close affiliate of a registered charity should be allowed to support mob violence and attacks on police officers.' The IHRC has described itself as a campaign, research and advocacy non-profit that 'struggles for justice for all peoples'. It was created in 1997 and has special consultative status with the economic and social council of the United Nations. In a letter to Jonathan Hall KC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, in January, the IHRC accused the police and Government of misusing anti-terror legislation against the Filton 10. In a letter to the UN, it called for charges to be dropped against Palestinian activists. 'The rights of free expression and protest are too important in a democracy to allow individuals to be investigated for potential terrorism merely because they may have been involved in protests or hold critical opinions,' the IHRC said. Senior figures in Palestine Action have spoken at Quds Day rallies organised by IHRC, a tradition which began in Iran in 1979 shortly after the Iranian revolution. Responding to The Telegraph, the IHRC said Palestine Action was 'not a terrorist organisation'. 'The move to proscribe it illustrates how politicised and malleable the term 'terrorism' has become – now so broad as to border on the meaningless,' it said in a statement. It said the assertion that the IHRC was 'ideologically aligned' with Iran was 'not evidence – it is opinion, and a deeply prejudiced one at that.'


Daily Mail
34 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Fascinating reason why America's bluest city could elect a REPUBLICAN mayor
Republicans have a shock chance to win the New York City mayoral election for the first time in 20 years as Democratic rivals turn on each other. Controversial vigilante group leader Curtis Silwa will take on Zohran Mamdani in the November 4 election after the socialist upstart won Tuesday's primary. Silwa lost to incumbent mayor Eric Adams in a landslide four years ago, but believes he has a much better chance this time after the bitter Mamdani-Cuomo faceoff. Sore losers Adams and Andrew Cuomo are expected to contest the election as independents after failing to win the Democratic nomination. Their presence on the ballot could split the left-wing vote so badly that Silwa could sneak in first if NYC's Republicans all show up to the polls. 'I'm the only Republican and I start with 30 per cent of the vote, minimum, so if I go up a few percentage points, I'm mayor,' he told the Daily Mail. 'All you have to do is do the math.' Mamdani, 33, came from obscurity to outgun Cuomo with a well-organized ground game blanketing the entire city with enthusiastic canvassers and slick marketing. Usually winning the primary would be all it took to become mayor in deep-blue NYC that hasn't elected a Republican since Michael Bloomberg in 2005, and even he only switched parties to avoid a crowded Democratic primary. But this time Mamdani will have to overwhelm his far more experienced rivals a second time as they refuse to go quietly. Another wildcard in the race is former assistant US attorney Jim Walden who is also running as an independent. No polls simulating a battle royale between Adams, Cuomo, Mamdani, and the rest of the field have been conducted. Two polls by Emerson College pitting Cuomo against Adams, Silwa, and Walden showed him easily winning, and the same if he was swapped for Mamdani. Other polls with an even wider field by the Manhattan Institute showed similar results, but none included both Cuomo and Mamdani. Silwa heads the vigilante group Guardian Angels, who in their distinctive red jackets and berets claims to foil crime on NYC streets. He is unsurprisingly running on a law and order platform, pledging to hire 7,000 extra NYPD officers and repeal Cuomo's bail reforms, which he claims let too many violent criminals back onto the streets. Silwa also plans a big effort to reduce fare evasion on the subway and prioritize prosecuting suspects accused of crime against women and minorities on it. Teams of social workers would also roam the subway network to assist homeless and mentally ill people and get them into shelters. He also hopes to address NYC's housing shortage by changing zoning rules and building more density outside Manhattan. Vegan Silwa also believed his animal-friendly views and policy of banning shelters from killing strays would give him an edge. 'It's an icebreaker with so many people who would never vote for a Republican,' he said. Silwa said Mandami's rivals failed because they didn't understand the changing mood and demographics in NYC, and what young people want. 'What Cuomo and Adams don't understand because they are baby boomers, is we're the minority now,' he said. 'This is the 1960s all over again, they can't figure out why you growing your hair long, why are you smoking weed? Why are you going to anti-war protests? 'Mandami represents that counterculture. 'I'm used to dealing with young people, I understand how they think, I understand what motivates them 'You will lose the millennials if you make it us versus them, and they are the majority now of the population.' Silwa said Cuomo 'self-destructed' because he was out of touch. 'They're not in the neighborhoods, they're not in the streets, they spend all their time up in the suites. That was Andrew Cuomo's problem,' he said. Mamdani took a commanding 43.51 per cent to 36.42 per cent lead over Cuomo in the first round of counting with Brad Lander in third with 11.31 per cent. As no candidate has more than half the vote, the ranked choice voting system will kick in to decide the winner based on preferences. But Mamdani's lead was big enough for Cuomo to concede the primary to his rival late on Tuesday night. Cuomo, in a speech to supporters, said Mamdani 'won' and that 'we are going to take a look and make some decisions. Tonight is his night'. All three Democrats have serious baggage that could depress turnout among left-leaning voters and further aid Silwa's chances. Adams didn't even contest the primary after polls showed he was certain to lose, and instead declared he would run as an independent from the outset. Goodwill from his rousing 2021 victory quickly evaporated after he was charged with corruption in September for allegedly receiving illegal campaign contributions from the Turkish Government in exchange for influence. He was charged with with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, federal program bribery and accepting campaign contributions from foreign nationals. Adams was also accused of defrauding New York City taxpayers of $10 million through allegedly fraudulent campaign financing. 'What NYC deserves is a mayor who's proud to run on his record - not one who ran from his record, or one who has no record,' Adams said after Mamdani's victory. 'We deserve a mayor who will keep driving down crime, support our police, fight anti-Semitism, and stand up for working-class New Yorkers. It's time to unite.' Donald Trump forced ordered prosecutors to dismiss the charges earlier this year, around the time Adams suddenly began vocally backing the president's migrant crackdown. Despite avoiding possible federal prison, Adams' electoral support evaporated and he had virtually no chance of getting the nomination. Silwa mocked Adams as being in Trump's pocket after he bailed him out. 'The only reason he's not in jail is because of President Donald Trump,' he said. 'He's a eunuch now. When President Trump calls and he says, Eric, I want you to jump, he asks how high.' Cuomo, who won three terms as New York governor, resigned in 2021 after a report from the state attorney general concluded he sexually harassed 11 women. He denied any wrongdoing and later said he regretted caving to pressure and stepping down. Cuomo's career was raised from the dead on the back of massive donations from wealthy Americans to his super PAC Fix the City. Mamdani has little professional experience, having only been employed a total of three years between graduating college in 2014 and his election to the New York State Assembly in 2020. He is also accused of not doing very much once he was elected, skipping 231 votes in the Assembly this year, more than half and the most of any member. His proposals include rent freezes, a free city bus service, universal childcare, and city-subsidized grocery stores - all of which are controversial. Mamdani vowed to pay for his extravagant wishlist by raising taxes on wealthy New Yorkers. To do so, he would need the stamp of approval from Governor Kathy Hocul and state lawmakers - who have already rubbished the proposal. But his biggest problem is he is perceived as anti-Semitic for his anti-Israel views and refusal to denounce fringe elements of pro-Palestine activism who regularly call to 'Globalize the Intifada'.