Trump Insists Iran Nuclear Sites Were Destroyed—Vance, Experts Suggest Otherwise
An early U.S. intelligence report found Iran's nuclear program was set back only a few months after U.S. strikes, contradicting claims by President Donald Trump it was 'totally destroyed' as Vice President JD Vance, military officials and nuclear watchdogs suggest the damage to Iran's nuclear facilities remains unconfirmed.
Trump claimed Iran's nuclear sites sustained 'monumental damage,' while other administration ... More officials say an assessment is ongoing. Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
An intelligence report issued by the Defense Intelligence Agency on Monday suggests Iran's nuclear program was delayed less than six months, unnamed officials familiar with the assessment told multiple outlets, and one official told the New York Times the U.S. strikes closed off entrances to two enrichment facilities but 'did not collapse their underground buildings.'
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt had said on ABC News on Monday the U.S. was 'confident' Iran's nuclear program was 'completely and totally obliterated,' noting there was a 'high degree of confidence' the locations the U.S. strikes took place is where Iran stored its enriched uranium and that Iran 'no longer [has] the capability … to threaten the world.'
International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi appeared to dispute those claims in a statement earlier Monday by suggesting the agency would need to verify damage to Iran's underground Fordow facility, including whether the site's uranium enrichment halls were impacted, though he noted the U.S. strikes likely caused 'very significant' damage.
On Sunday, hours after the mission, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine said an assessment on damage to Iran's nuclear sites was 'still pending,' and Caine claimed it was 'way too early for me to comment on what may or may not still be there.'
Vance, in an interview with ABC on Sunday, suggested the U.S. strikes only set back Iran's potential to weaponize its uranium stockpile and said the U.S. was 'going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel.'
Jeffrey Lewis, a professor of nonproliferation at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, wrote on X he was 'unimpressed' by the U.S. strikes while citing satellite images of the attacks, claiming the U.S. 'failed to target significant elements of Iran's nuclear materials and production infrastructure.'
'The sites we hit in Iran were totally destroyed, and everyone knows it,' Trump wrote on Truth Social on Monday, disputing 'Fake News' he claims 'would say anything different in order to try and demean, as much as possible—and even they say they were 'pretty well destroyed!'' Trump claimed Saturday that Iran's nuclear enrichment facilities were 'completely and totally obliterated,' adding late Sunday Iran's nuclear site in Fordow sustained 'monumental damage. How Large Is Iran's Uranium Stockpile?
Iran stored about 400 kilograms (about 881 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60%, near weapons-grade enrichment of 90%, according to Grossi. It's unclear whether Iran's uranium stockpile is still this large, Grossi noted, adding IAEA's inspectors last verified Iran's stockpile a 'few days' before Iran's conflict with Israel began earlier this month.
It's possible Iran could rebuild its nuclear program, but a timeline for development would depend on how much damage was done to Iran's nuclear sites, according to the Centers for Strategic and International Studies, a U.S.-based think tank. Recent U.S. strikes would make Iran 'more motivated than ever' to obtain nuclear weapons, Rosemary Kelanic, a director at the U.S.-based think tank Defense Priorities, told the New York Times. Some American officials estimated an attack on Fordow set back Iran's nuclear program by as much as five years, the Times reported. What We Don't Know
Whether Iran moved its uranium stockpile before the U.S. strikes. Grossi said Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi notified him on June 13—the day Israel launched airstrikes at Iran—that Iran would adopt unspecified 'special measures to protect our nuclear equipment and materials.' Iran is required to disclose whether its nuclear materials are transferred to another facility, Grossi said, though he did not specify whether Iran had done so. Grossi reportedly said he requested IAEA's inspectors to return to Iran's sites to 'account for the stockpiles of uranium.' Key Background
Trump announced Saturday the U.S. attacked Iran's nuclear sites in Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan. The mission, with the codename 'Operation Midnight Hammer,' was a 'precision operation' that targeted Iran's nuclear capabilities, Hegseth said. The strikes followed weeks of the Trump administration pushing for Iran to end its nuclear program before a conflict escalated between Iran and Israel. Shortly after the strikes, Trump warned Iran against retaliating, claiming, 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran.' Vance echoed Trump's call for peace and said the U.S. was 'not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program.' Araghchi accused the U.S. of an 'unprecedented violation' of the UN's founding charter and international law, arguing Trump was 'abusing our commitment to diplomacy.' Forbes U.S. Strikes Iran: Qatar Closes Airspace As U.S. Citizens Urged To Shelter (Live Updates) By Zachary Folk
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
14 minutes ago
- USA Today
NATO commits to higher spending sought by Trump and mutual defense
While Trump got what he wanted at the brief NATO summit, his allies will be relieved he committed to the fundamental principle of collective defense. THE HAGUE, June 25 (Reuters) - NATO leaders on June 25 backed the big increase in defense spending that President Donald Trump had demanded, and restated their commitment to defend each other from attack. While Trump got what he wanted at the brief summit, tailor-made for him, his NATO allies will be relieved that he committed to the fundamental principle of collective defense after less clear-cut language on June 24. In a five-point statement, NATO endorsed a higher defence spending goal of 5% of GDP by 2035 - a response not only to Trump but also to Europeans' fears that Russia poses a growing threat to their security following the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. More: Israel-Iran ceasefire seems to hold as Trump lands in Europe for NATO summit The 32 allies' brief communique added: "We reaffirm our ironclad commitment to collective defense as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty – that an attack on one is an attack on all." Asked to clarify his own stance on Article 5, Trump said: "I stand with it. That's why I'm here. If I didn't stand with it, I wouldn't be here." Macron brings up trade war at NATO summit Trump had long demanded in no uncertain terms that for other countries step up their spending on defense to reduce NATO's heavy reliance on the U.S. Despite an appearance of general agreement, French President Emmanuel Macron raised the issue of the steep import tariffs threatened by Trump, and the damage they may do to transatlantic trade, as a barrier to increased defense spending. More: Can Trump pull off peace plans, trade deals at the G7? What to know about the summit "You cannot come to us as allies and ask that we spend more, tell us we will spend more at NATO - and do a trade war. It's an aberration," he told reporters. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, who hosted the summit in his home city of The Hague, said NATO would emerge as a 'stronger, fairer and more lethal' alliance. He had earlier acknowledged that it was not easy for European countries and Canada to find the extra money, but said it was vital to do so. "There is absolute conviction with my colleagues at the table that, given this threat from the Russians, given the international security situation, there is no alternative," the former Dutch prime minister told reporters in his home city of The Hague. The new spending target - to be achieved over the next 10 years - is a jump worth hundreds of billions of dollars a year from the current goal of 2% of GDP, although it will be measured differently. Countries would spend 3.5% of GDP on core defence - such as troops and weapons - and 1.5% on broader defence-related measures such as cyber security, protecting pipelines and adapting roads and bridges to handle heavy military vehicles. All NATO members have backed a statement enshrining the target, although Spain declared it does not need to meet the goal and can meet its commitments by spending much less. More: Trump says US strike impaired Iran's nukes. What does Pentagon say? Live updates Rutte disputes that but accepted a diplomatic fudge with Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez as part of his efforts to give Trump a diplomatic victory and make the summit go smoothly. Spain said on June 25 that it did not expect its stance to have any repercussions. Trump meets Zelenskyy after summit Rutte kept the summit and its final statement short and focused on the spending pledge to try to avert any friction with Trump. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had to settle for attending the pre-summit June 24 dinner rather than the main meeting on June 25, although he met Trump separately after the conference ended. The Kremlin on June 24 accused NATO of being on a path of rampant militarization and portraying Russia as a "fiend of hell" in order to justify its big increase in defense spending.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why gasoline prices aren't tumbling along with sinking oil
Oil futures tumbled again Tuesday on hopes that the shaky ceasefire between Israel and Iran would reduce if not eliminate the risk any significant disruption to global energy markets. Gasoline futures fell, too. So when will you notice prices falling at the pump? It may be a while. Because gas prices didn't shoot significantly higher over the past two weeks after Israel and Iran began their recent hostilities, you probably won't notice any big savings anytime soon. The national average gasoline price stood at $3.12 on June 10 according to AAA, just before oil and gasoline prices started their climb on rising concerns about a conflict in the days before the fighting started between Israel and Iran. The so-called New York harbor prices for gasoline futures closed at a wholesale price of only $2.09. A barrel of Brent crude, the global benchmark for oil closed at $66.60 that day. Both wholesale gasoline and oil futures stared rising steadily June 11 and continued to climb through the early hours of trading this past Sunday night, after the US bombing of nuclear sites in Iran raised fears of a broader conflict. Brent Crude futures briefly topped $80 a barrel late Sunday. But throughout the day Monday as those fears of a wider conflict retreated and hopes for a cease fire increased, the price of oil started falling sharply. Oil Monday closed down 7% at $70.65 a barrel, while a so-called New York harbor prices for gasoline futures fell about 5% to a wholesale price of $2.22 a gallon. And the wholesale prices fell another 5% in midday trading Tuesday to a $2.09 price, essentially matching the price before the recent run-up. The AAA average retail price for a gallon of regular gasoline stood Monday at $3.22, based on a survey of gas stations conducted on Sunday, and it remains there in Tuesday's reading. But that means there was only a 3% rise in pump prices from June 10 to today's level, so there's not a lot of room for prices to fall to go back to pre-conflict levels. Tom Kloza, an independent oil and gasoline price expert, said he could see prices starting to decline a little bit in the coming days as stations take deliveries of cheaper wholesale gas. The seasonal pick-up in summer driving will stop prices from falling significantly in the coming weeks, he believes. But he does think that a glut of oil on global markets and strong US refining capacity could send prices down sharply through the rest of this year once the peak July demand wanes. 'It looks like we're well supplied, and that's bearish for prices,' he said. The strong supply has little to do with President Donald Trump's 'drill, baby, drill' call to increase production. Overall US production is roughly unchanged from this time last year and it's not likely to increase significantly at the current prices, Kloza said, especially with 50% tariffs on imported steel raising the cost of the pipes used in oil exploration. The price of oil futures did not spike as high as during some past global incidents, such as Russia's attack on Ukraine and the imposition of sanctions on Russia by western nations that followed. In that case Brent prices soared 44% from early January 2022 through early March of that year. But Kloza said there isn't as much speculative money in oil futures markets as there used to driving up prices in reaction to external events. 'That money is much more likely to go into crypto and to go into big tech today,' he said. 'There's only so much money to go around.' Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Washington Post
18 minutes ago
- Washington Post
WATCH: President Trump holds press conference at NATO summit
LIVE Politics President Trump holds press conference at NATO summit June 25, 2025 | 12:50 PM GMT President Donald Trump participates in a press conference at the NATO summit in The Hague on June 25, after meeting with members of the defense alliance.
