
No known intelligence that Iran moved uranium, US defense chief says
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Thursday said he was unaware of any intelligence suggesting Iran had moved any of its highly enriched uranium to shield it from U.S. strikes, amid continuing questions about the state of Iran's nuclear program.
U.S. military bombers carried out strikes against three Iranian nuclear facilities early Sunday local time using more than a dozen 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs.
The results of the strikes are being closely watched to see how far they may have set back Iran's nuclear program, after President Donald Trump said it had been obliterated.
"I'm not aware of any intelligence that I've reviewed that says things were not where they were supposed to be, moved or otherwise," Hegseth told an often fiery news conference.
Trump, who watched Hegseth's exchange with reporters, echoed his defense secretary, saying it would have taken too long to remove anything.
"The cars and small trucks at the site were those of concrete workers trying to cover up the top of the shafts. Nothing was taken out of (the) facility," Trump wrote on his social media platform, without providing evidence.
Several experts have cautioned that Iran likely moved a stockpile of near weapons-grade highly enriched uranium out of the deeply buried Fordow site before the strikes, and could be hiding it in unknown locations.
They noted satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies showing "unusual activity" at Fordow on Thursday and Friday, with a long line of vehicles waiting outside an entrance to the facility. A senior Iranian source told Reuters on Sunday most of the 60% highly enriched uranium had been moved to an undisclosed location before the attack.
WHEREABOUTS OF URANIUM
The Financial Times, citing European intelligence assessments, reported that Iran's highly enriched uranium stockpile remains largely intact since it was not concentrated at Fordow.
Hegseth's comments denying such claims came at the news briefing where he also accused journalists of downplaying the success of the strikes following a leaked preliminary assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency suggesting they may have only set back Iran by months.
He said the assessment was low confidence, and, citing comments from CIA Director John Ratcliffe, had been overtaken by intelligence showing Iran's nuclear program was severely damaged and would take years to rebuild.
U.S. senators briefed later on Thursday by Ratcliffe, Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and General Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said it was clear the strikes had damaged Iran's nuclear facilities, though it would take time to assess by how much.
"I will say it was not part of the mission to destroy all their enriched uranium or to seize it or anything else," Republican Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton of Arkansas told reporters after the classified briefing, adding that he was confident the mission was "extraordinary."
Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Intelligence Committee Democrat, said the only way to be certain about Iran's nuclear capabilities was to have inspectors on the ground.
"It was clear, and again, this is long before this brief, that some of the enriched uranium was never going to be taken out by a bunker-buster bomb, so some of that obviously remains," Warner said.
Tulsi Gabbard, who normally would conduct such briefings as director of national intelligence, did not participate. Trump said last week that she was wrong in suggesting there was no evidence Iran was building a nuclear weapon.
The four officials were due to brief the House of Representatives on Friday.
Senators are expected to vote this week on a resolution that would require congressional approval for strikes against Iran, which is not expected to be enacted.
At the Pentagon news conference, Hegseth described the strikes as "historically successful." His comments came after Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Iran would respond to any future U.S. attack by striking American military bases in the Middle East.
Khamenei claimed victory after 12 days of war, and promised Iran would not surrender despite Trump's calls.
MEDIA 'HATRED'
During the news conference, Hegseth criticized the media, without evidence, for having an anti-Trump bias.
"It's in your DNA and in your blood to cheer against Trump because you want him not to be successful so bad," Hegseth said.
"There are so many aspects of what our brave men and women did that ... because of the hatred of this press corps, are undermined," he said.
Trump praised Hegseth's news conference as: "One of the greatest, most professional, and most 'confirming' News Conferences I have ever seen!"
On X, Hegseth thanked Trump for his praise.
During the press conference, Caine, the top U.S. general, largely stuck to technical details, showing a video testing the bombs on a bunker like the ones struck on Sunday.
Caine declined to provide his own assessment of the strike, deferring to the intelligence community. He denied being under pressure to present a more optimistic view of the U.S. strikes and said he would not change his assessment due to politics.
Uniformed military officials are supposed to remain apolitical.
"I've never been pressured by the president or the secretary to do anything other than tell them exactly what I'm thinking, and that's exactly what I've done," Caine said.
(Reporting by Idrees Ali, Phil Stewart and Patricia Zengerle; Additional reporting by Susan Heavey; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama, Daniel Wallis and Michael Learmonth)

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


The Star
28 minutes ago
- The Star
US says deal with Beijing will expedite rare earth exports from China
US President Donald Trump. — Reuters WASHINGTON: The United States has reached an agreement with China on how to expedite rare earth shipments to the U.S., a White House official said on Thursday, amid efforts to end a trade war between the world's biggest economies. President Donald Trump earlier said the United States had signed a deal with China on Wednesday, without providing additional details, and that there might be a separate deal coming up that would "open up" India. During U.S.-China trade talks in May in Geneva, Beijing committed to removing non-tariff countermeasures imposed against the United States since April 2, although it was unclear how some of those measures would be walked back. As part of its retaliation against new U.S. tariffs, China suspended exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets, upending the supply chains central to automakers, aerospace manufacturers, semiconductor companies and military contractors around the world. "The administration and China agreed to an additional understanding for a framework to implement the Geneva agreement," a White House official said on Thursday. The understanding is "about how we can implement expediting rare earths shipments to the U.S. again", the official said. A separate administration official said the U.S.-China agreement took place earlier this week. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was quoted as saying by Bloomberg: "They're going to deliver rare earths to us" and once they do that "we'll take down our countermeasures." On Friday, China's commerce ministry said the two countries recently confirmed details on the framework of implementing the Geneva trade talks consensus. It said China will approve export applications of controlled items in accordance with the law. It did not mention rare earths. While the agreement shows potential progress following months of trade uncertainty and disruption since Trump took office in January, it also underscores the long road ahead to a final, definitive trade deal between the two economic rivals. China has been taking its dual-use restrictions on rare earths "very seriously" and has been vetting buyers to ensure that materials are not diverted to U.S. military uses, according to an industry source. This has slowed down the licensing process. The Geneva deal had faltered over China's curbs on critical minerals exports, prompting the Trump administration to respond with export controls of its own preventing shipments of semiconductor design software, aircraft and other goods to China. In early June, Reuters reported China had granted temporary export licenses to rare-earth suppliers of the top three U.S. automakers, according to two sources familiar with the matter, as supply chain disruptions began to surface from export curbs on those materials. Later in the month, Trump said there was a deal with China in which Beijing would supply magnets and rare earth minerals while the U.S. would allow Chinese students in its colleges and universities. - Reuters


The Star
31 minutes ago
- The Star
Trump's proposed remittance tax raises alarms among Filipino migrants
LOS ANGELES: For millions of Filipino workers in the United States, sending money back home is more than a financial transaction – it's a vital act of care and survival. A proposed 3.5 per cent tax on remittances, embedded in the Trump administration's sweeping 'One Big, Beautiful Bill,' has raised alarms among Filipino immigrants who rely on remittances to support families in the Philippines. If enacted, the tax would take effect on Jan 1, 2026, and apply to remittances sent by non-US citizens, including green card holders and H-1B visa holders. Aquilina Soriano Versoza, executive director of the Pilipino Workers Center of Southern California (PWC), a grassroots nonprofit that services and organises low-wage and immigrant Filipino communities in the US, warned that the proposed measure would significantly harm the Filipino community. 'This bill will significantly affect Filipino workers who are not only making a living for themselves but also working hard to support their families back home in the Philippines,' she said. Versoza further criticised the proposal as discriminatory: 'Targeting remittances sent by non-US citizens with increased taxes is a clear act of discrimination that unfairly burdens immigrant communities. Tax policies should be applied equitably to all individuals, regardless of their immigration status.' The proposed levy comes at a time when many Filipino families in the Philippines are already struggling with inflation and economic instability. For countless households, remittances from Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) spell the difference between financial security and hardship. Josephine Biclar, a caregiver and worker leader at the Pilipino Workers Center in Los Angeles, shared how inflation has already strained her ability to send money home. 'In our caregiving jobs, no work equals no pay. So right now, we are barely making ends meet, hardly sending anything to the Philippines because of inflation. If there are additional taxes on remittances, there will hardly be any money left to send.' Remittances are a key pillar of the Philippine economy, accounting for 8.3 per cent of the country's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 7.4 pe cent of Gross National Income (GNI). The United States remains the largest source of these funds. In 2024, Filipino migrant workers sent a record-breaking $38.34 billion back to the Philippines – an increase of 3 per cent from the previous year, according to the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). This growth was driven by both land-based and sea-based workers, highlighting the enduring commitment of OFWs to their families. Analysts warn that the proposed tax could reduce remittance flows by as much as 5.6 percent, potentially costing the Philippines an estimated $500 million annually. The US plays a central role in remittance transactions, as most remittance centers abroad channel funds through correspondent banks based in the US. BSP Governor Eli Remolona Jr responded cautiously, saying the central bank is still evaluating the proposed legislation and hopes it will not have a significant negative impact. Filipino immigrant communities in the US fear the measure will make their already difficult lives even harder. Some worry the tax may push workers to rely on informal and riskier channels to send money home. Versoza also pointed out logistical and ethical challenges the law could introduce: 'Additionally, money remittance service providers currently do not require information about a sender's immigration or citizenship status. Implementing this bill would not only force these companies to begin verifying this information, it would also raise significant concerns about privacy, data security and potential racial profiling. Singling out non-citizens for additional financial penalties is evidently discriminatory.' Biclar emphasised how the combined effects of inflation, taxes, and immigration fears are affecting Filipino workers' lives: 'Life for Filipinos in the US is difficult because of inflation and tariffs on remittances. Due to the high cost of living, we are forced to reduce the amount of money we send to our families in the Philippines. Sending money is really affected because even our survival here is a struggle, and if additional taxes are imposed on remittances, where else will we get extra money?' Beyond the economic impact, advocates warn that the remittance tax is part of a broader legislative package that also includes cuts to social safety nets – measures that could further marginalise immigrant communities. Biclar also cited growing anxiety among immigrants amid heightened immigration enforcement: 'Aside from tariffs and inflation, the current immigration situation in the US is affecting everyone, not only the undocumented but also those with papers. We have no choice but to slow down at work. It's scary to go out because of ICE raids.' As the bill continues to face deliberation in the Senate, its final outcome remains unclear. Still, Filipino workers and advocacy groups are preparing for the possibility that the remittance tax could become law – an outcome many believe would deeply undermine the cross-border bonds that sustain Filipino families around the world. - Philippine Daily Inquirer/ANN

Malay Mail
38 minutes ago
- Malay Mail
‘Daddy's home': Love-bombed in The Hague, Trump basks in Nato flattery
WASHINGTON, June 27 — It will go down as the summit where US President Donald Trump learned to stop worrying and love Nato. Trump revelled in gushing praise from leaders in The Hague — including being called 'daddy' by alliance chief Mark Rutte — and a pledge to boost defence spending as he had demanded. But it went further than just lapping up flattery. Trump also spoke of what sounded like an almost religious conversion to Nato, after years of bashing other members as freeloaders and threatening to leave. 'I came here because it was something I'm supposed to be doing, but I left here a little bit differently,' Trump said at his closing press conference on Wednesday. 'I watched the heads of these countries get up, and the love and the passion that they showed for their country was unbelievable. I've never seen quite anything like it. 'It was really moving to see it.' A day after returning to the White House, Trump still sounded uncharacteristically touchy-feely about his time with his 31 Nato counterparts. 'A wonderful day with incredible and caring Leaders,' he posted on his Truth Social platform yesterday. Turnaround It was a remarkable turnaround from the US president's first term. Trump repeatedly berated allies as not paying up and threatened to pull the United States out of Nato as part of his wider disdain for international institutions and alliances. At his first summit in 2017 in Brussels, Trump memorably shoved aside Montenegro's prime minister Dusko Markovic as he made his way to the front of the stage. A year later Trump publicly lambasted Germany and privately talked about wanting to quit. But this time Nato leaders had carefully choreographed the trip. They massaged the numbers to give Trump the defence spending deal he craved. And while Trump headed to the summit dropping F-bombs in frustration at a shaky Iran-Israel ceasefire, Nato leaders love-bombed him from the moment he arrived. The Netherlands put him up overnight in the Dutch king's royal palace and gave him a royal dinner and breakfast — 'beautiful,' according to Trump — while Nato organisers kept the summit deliberately short. Frederick Kempe, the chief executive officer of the Atlantic Council, said Trump had 'waxed poetic' about Nato in a way he had never done before. 'Trump — the vilifier of European deadbeats on defence and crusader against allies for what he sees as unfair trade practices — sounded like an altered man,' he said in a commentary. 'Daddy's Home' The question now is what it means for Nato when the alliance's priorities end up guided by one man. The final summit statement's language on Russia's invasion of Ukraine was watered down from previous years. It also made no mention of Ukraine's push to join Nato. Reporters were not allowed into Trump's meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The move was partly because of their Oval Office bust-up in February, but it also deprived Zelensky of the set-piece he had craved. 'The biggest loser was Ukraine,' said Ed Arnold of the Royal United Services Institute in London. Trump also hinted at what lies in store for any backsliders on the defence spending pledge, threatening to make Spain 'pay' on trade over its resistance to commit to the new target. As with any relationship, the pressure will now be on Nato to keep up the first flush of love over the three summits that are due to take place over the rest of Trump's second term. 'The real worry is that Nato will be unable to keep up the hype,' said Arnold. For now, though, Trump and his administration seem to be content. As he arrived back in Washington, the White House posted a video of summit highlights, with the caption: 'Daddy's Home.' — AFP