Satellite Images Support Trump's Iran Nuke Sites "Obliterated" Claims
Tehran:
US President Donald Trump on Wednesday claimed the American military has caused 'total obliteration' at three Iranian nuclear sites, including Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan, setting the country's atomic programme back by "decades". Speaking at the NATO summit in the Hague, the US leader said Tehran won't be "building bombs for a long time."
US Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth assessed the damage in Iran as "moderate to severe", while Secretary of State Marco Rubio insisted that the Islamic republic's nuclear program is way behind what it was before the US strikes.
"Anything in the world can be rebuilt, but now we know where it is. If they try to rebuild it, we'll have options there as well," Rubio said, adding that the FBI is investigating nuclear site leaks.
The latest high-resolution satellite images of the three key nuclear installations seem to support Trump's claim and show that US strikes may have sabotaged the Islamic Republic's atomic capabilities significantly. Satellite images taken on Tuesday of the uranium enrichment facility at Fordow show large craters, possible collapsed tunnel entrances and holes on top of a mountain ridge.
They also show damage to a large support structure on the Fordow site, which may have been used by operators to control ventilation for the underground enrichment halls.
However, despite the damage seen in images, there were no reports of radiation release from the site, according to the UN atomic watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The American forces also joined Israel in attacking Iran's Isfahan Nuclear Technology and Research Centre, located 450 kilometres south of Tehran. Images of this facility also show extensive damage on site after the US bombing. A large cluster of buildings seems to be destroyed on the complex that houses essential laboratories and a uranium conversion facility, crucial for the initial stages of nuclear fuel production.
Though no creator was seen suggesting a direct hit on the underground infrastructure, the entry to the tunnel has been damaged and blocked.
This facility was also targeted by earlier Israeli strikes, particularly the conversion plant, but the IAEA has found no radiation leakage or elevated radiation levels in the surrounding areas after any attacks.
Earlier images from the Natanz nuclear site, which was also targeted by the US, showed that key infrastructure, such as the substation, main power building, emergency supply, and backup generators, was also destroyed. However, no tradition was reported here either.
The IAEA monitors are still trying to assess the extent of damage caused by the bombing. However, Iranian lawmakers voted Wednesday in favour of suspending cooperation with the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, state TV said.
"The International Atomic Energy Agency, which refused to even marginally condemn the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, put its international credibility up for auction," Iran's parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said, according to state TV.
Ghalibaf said, "The Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran will suspend its cooperation with the IAEA until the security of the nuclear facilities is guaranteed."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
40 minutes ago
- NDTV
After US Strikes, UN Watchdog Wants Iran Nuclear Sites Inspected On Priority
Vienna: UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said on Wednesday his top priority is getting his inspectors back to Iran's nuclear facilities to assess the impact of US and Israeli military strikes and verify its stocks of enriched uranium. "This is the number 1 priority," International Atomic Energy Agency chief Grossi told a news conference at an Austrian security cabinet meeting. He is seeking his inspectors' return to Iranian sites including the three plants where it was enriching uranium until Israel launched strikes on June 13. Asked if Iran had informed him of the status of its stocks of enriched uranium, particularly its uranium enriched to up to 60% purity, close to weapons grade, he pointed to a letter he received from Iran on June 13, saying Iran would take "special measures" to protect its nuclear materials and equipment. "They did not get into details as to what that meant but clearly that was the implicit meaning of that. We can imagine this material is there," Mr. Grossi said, suggesting much of that material had survived the attacks.
NDTV
41 minutes ago
- NDTV
Who Is Queen Maxima? Dutch Empress Stole The Show At NATO Summit
Queen Maxima of the Netherlands captivated world leaders with her striking lime-green ensemble at the recent NATO summit. The queen and her husband, King Willem-Alexander, welcomed world leaders from 32 countries at The Hague's World Forum on Tuesday. This was the first time the Netherlands played host to a NATO summit. In the summit's family photo, Queen Maxima's striking lime-green jumpsuit featured a V-neckline and flowing cape-like sleeves. A decorative embellishment on one shoulder elevated her entire look. Who Is Queen Maxima? Born on May 17, 1971, as Maxima Zorreguieta, to Jorge Horacio Zorreguieta and Maria del Carmen Cerruti de Zorreguieta, she grew up in Buenos Aires. She graduated in economics from the Universidad Catolica Argentina in 1995. Even during her university days, she worked in the Sales Department of Boston Securities SA in Buenos Aires, according to the official website of the Royal House of Netherlands. At the time, she also taught children and adults, English, and mathematics to secondary school pupils and first-year students. Queen Maxima first worked for HSBC James Capel Inc. in New York from 1996 to 1998. She was Vice-President of Latin American Institutional Sales. Next, she was at Dresdner Kleinwort Benson, as Vice-President of the Emerging Markets Division, until July 1999. Her next move took her to Deutsche Bank in New York, placing her as the Vice-President of Institutional Sales. From May 2000 to March 2001, she worked at the EU Representative Office of Deutsche Bank in Brussels. She first met her husband, then-Crown Prince Willem-Alexander, at a party in Spain in 1999. While the couple quickly fell in love, their relationship took a turn for the worse when the Dutch media revealed that Maxima's father had been a minister for Argentina's violent military junta regime during the infamous Dirty War. Despite the uproar, former Queen Beatrix approved her oldest son's union, calling Maxima a "modern, intelligent woman." A year after their marriage, Willem-Alexander became the King of the Netherlands at the age of 46. He ascended to the throne on April 30, 2013, upon the abdication of his mother, Queen Beatrix. With his coronation, Maxima became the queen of the Netherlands. She quickly gained popularity for her charisma, smart wit, and strong work ethic. Today, Maxima is well recognised for taking a stand on tough political issues such as immigration and women's economic empowerment. The Dutch Queen also received praise for her early support of LGBTQ+ rights. The royal couple is known for their easygoing attitude toward life as a monarch. They opted out of hosting a coronation ceremony and chose to send their three children, Princess Catharina-Amalia, 21, Princess Alexia, 19, and Princess Ariane, 18, to public school instead of a prestigious private institution. Their oldest daughter, Catharina-Amalia, also known as Princess of Orange, is the heir to the Dutch crown.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
41 minutes ago
- First Post
Why Iran may go the North Korea route to develop its nuclear weapons
US and Israeli strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities may strengthen Tehran's resolve to pursue a nuclear bomb and could lead to its withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. In 2003, North Korea withdrew from the treaty and went on to develop a nuclear arsenal. It is now estimated to have up to 50 warheads read more if Iran follows through on its threat to pull out of the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), this will gravely damage the global nuclear nonproliferation regime. File image/Reuters The United States' and Israel's strikes on Iran are concerning, and not just for the questionable legal justifications provided by both governments. Even if their attacks cause severe damage to Iran's nuclear facilities, this will only harden Iran's resolve to acquire a bomb. And if Iran follows through on its threat to pull out of the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), this will gravely damage the global nuclear nonproliferation regime. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In a decade of international security crises, this could be the most serious. Is there still time to prevent this from happening? A treaty in crisis In May 2015, I attended the five-yearly review conference of the NPT. Delegates debated a draft outcome for weeks, and then, not for the first time, went home with nothing. Delegates from the US, United Kingdom and Canada blocked the final outcome to prevent words being added that would call for Israel to attend a disarmament conference. Russia did the same in 2022 in protest at language on its illegal occupation of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power station in Ukraine. Now, in the latest challenge to the NPT, Israel and the US have bombed Iran's nuclear complexes to ostensibly enforce a treaty neither one respects. When the treaty was adopted in 1968, it allowed the five nuclear-armed states at the time – the US, Soviet Union, France, UK and China – to join if they committed not to pass weapons or material to other states, and to disarm themselves. The IAEA flag flutters outside their headquarters after the first day of the agency's quarterly Board of Governors meeting at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, Austria, June 9, 2025. Reuters All other members had to pledge never to acquire nuclear weapons. Newer nuclear powers were not permitted to join unless they gave up their weapons. Israel declined to join, as it had developed its own undeclared nuclear arsenal by the late 1960s. India, Pakistan and South Sudan have also never signed; North Korea was a member but withdrew in 2003. Only South Sudan does not have nuclear weapons today. To make the obligations enforceable and strengthen safeguards against the diversion of nuclear material to non-nuclear weapons states, members were later required to sign the IAEA Additional Protocol. This gave the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) wide powers to inspect a state's nuclear facilities and detect violations. It was the IAEA that first blew the whistle on Iran's concerning uranium enrichment activity in 2003. Just before Israel's attacks this month, the organisation also reported Iran was in breach of its obligations under the NPT for the first time in two decades. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The NPT is arguably the world's most universal, important and successful security treaty, but it is also paradoxically vulnerable. The treaty's underlying consensus has been damaged by the failure of the five nuclear-weapon states to disarm as required, and by the failure to prevent North Korea from developing a now formidable nuclear arsenal. North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un. North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003, tested a weapon in 2006, and now may have up to 50 warheads. File image/ AFP North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003, tested a weapon in 2006, and now may have up to 50 warheads. Iran could be next. Where do things go from here? Iran argues Israel's attacks have undermined the credibility of the IAEA, given Israel used the IAEA's new report on Iran as a pretext for its strikes, taking the matter out of the hands of the UN Security Council. For its part, the IAEA has maintained a principled position and criticised both the US and Israeli strikes. Iran has retaliated with its own missile strikes against both Israel and a US base in Qatar. In addition, it wasted no time announcing it would withdraw from the NPT. On June 23, an Iranian parliament committee also approved a bill that would fully suspend Iran's cooperation with the IAEA, including allowing inspections and submitting reports to the organisation. Iran's envoy to the IAEA, Reza Najafi, said the US strikes: STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD […] delivered a fundamental and irreparable blow to the international non-proliferation regime conclusively demonstrating that the existing NPT framework has been rendered ineffective. Even if Israel and the US consider their bombing campaign successful, it has almost certainly renewed the Iranians' resolve to build a weapon. The strikes may only delay an Iranian bomb by a few years. Iran will have two paths to do so. The slower path would be to reconstitute its enrichment activity and obtain nuclear implosion designs, which create extremely devastating weapons, from Russia or North Korea. Alternatively, Russia could send Iran some of its weapons. This should be a real concern given Moscow's cascade of withdrawals from critical arms control agreements over the last decade. An Iranian bomb could then trigger NPT withdrawals by other regional states, especially Saudi Arabia, who suddenly face a new threat to their security. Why Iran might now seek a bomb Iran's support for Hamas, Hezbollah and Syria's Assad regime certainly shows it is a dangerous international actor. Iranian leaders have also long used alarming rhetoric about Israel's destruction. However repugnant the words, Israeli and US conservatives have misjudged Iran's motives in seeking nuclear weapons. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Israel fears an Iranian bomb would be an existential threat to its survival, given Iran's promises to destroy it. But this neglects the fact that Israel already possesses a potent (if undeclared) nuclear deterrent capability. Israeli anxieties about an Iranian bomb should not be dismissed. But other analysts (myself included) see Iran's desire for nuclear weapons capability more as a way to establish deterrence to prevent future military attacks from Israel and the US to protect their regime. Iranians were shaken by Iraq's invasion in 1980 and then again by the US-led removal of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003. This war with Israel and the US will shake them even more. Last week, I felt that if the Israeli bombing ceased, a new diplomatic effort to bring Iran into compliance with the IAEA and persuade it to abandon its program might have a chance. However, the US strikes may have buried that possibility for decades. And by then, the damage to the nonproliferation regime could be irreversible. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Anthony Burke, Professor of Environmental Politics & International Relations, UNSW Sydney This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
