
US–Israel bombed the nuclear sites, but not the nuclear threat: Iran still holds 400kg of enriched Uranium, enough to make 10 N-bombs
What happened during the strikes?
Live Events
Where did the Uranium go?
IAEA confirms last inspection was days before attack
Trump declares victory. But confusion follows
Is Iran still pursuing nuclear weapons?
Experts warn threat is not over
Washington admits uncertainty
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
The US says it destroyed Iran's key nuclear sites last week. But 400kg of enriched uranium—enough to build up to ten atomic bombs—is still unaccounted for.Vice President JD Vance confirmed the missing material during an interview with ABC News, saying the administration 'would work in the coming weeks to do something about the fuel and would have conversations with the Iranians.'That fuel is enriched to 60%. It only takes enrichment to 90% to make a weapon.At the heart of the operation were six bunker-busting bombs , dropped by US B-2 Spirit bombers on three nuclear sites: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The attack came after satellite images showed a line of 16 trucks outside Fordow—a site built deep inside a mountain and resistant to most conventional strikes.Israel requested Washington use its most advanced bombers and GBU-37 bunker-buster munitions.The strikes reportedly caused 'severe damage and destruction,' according to US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chair Gen Dan Caine.Trump later said on Truth Social: 'We have completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran… A full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow. All planes are safely on their way home… NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE!'That's the question no one can answer. Post-strike satellite images showed the trucks were gone.Israeli officials believe Iran managed to move the stockpile, and possibly some centrifuges, just before the attack. They shared this view with The New York Times.Sima Shine, a former Iran expert at Mossad, told the Financial Times: 'They have enough enriched uranium somewhere, and they took some advanced centrifuges somewhere, in order to enable them to some day go to a nuclear device… The programme is not destroyed completely, no matter what the Americans say.'TS2 Space, a Polish defence firm, reviewed satellite images and said Iran appeared to be shifting critical materials. The Open Source Centre in London also confirmed visual evidence of frantic movement days before the bombing.The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it last saw the stockpile a week before Israel's first strike.Its Director-General, Rafael Grossi, addressed the UN Security Council and called for inspections to resume immediately. 'It is essential,' he said. He warned military escalation 'delays this indispensable work' and harms chances of a diplomatic solution.Kelsey Davenport, of the Arms Control Association, told AFP: 'It will be difficult if not impossible to track down all of Iran's 60 per cent enriched uranium, stored in small canisters that are easily transportable by car.'Hours after the strike, Trump told ABC News: 'We're not involved in it (but) it's possible we could…' and urged both Iran and Israel to 'reach an accord before it is too late.'Afterwards, he announced a 'total and complete' ceasefire and declared the 12-day conflict over.But the US intelligence community has since shown signs of uncertainty.Tulsi Gabbard, Director of National Intelligence, had told Congress earlier that Iran was not building nuclear weapons. But on Saturday, she reversed her position, saying Iran could produce them 'within weeks.' Trump had called her previous assessment 'wrong.'Tehran insists its nuclear programme is peaceful. But Israel claims otherwise, saying Iran was nearing a 'point of no return.'After the strikes, Iran threatened to leave the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Deputy Foreign Minister Takht Ravanchi was defiant: 'No one can tell us what to do…'A CNN report noted that Israel's first strikes likely only delayed Iran's nuclear programme by a few months. The deeper parts of the programme, particularly those buried under mountains like at Fordow, were not seriously damaged.Still, a senior official told CNN that 'Tehran does have all the necessary ingredients.'Ronen Solomon, an Israeli intelligence analyst, told The Telegraph: 'They have the uranium, but they can't do a lot with it unless they have built something we don't know about on a small scale.'But many experts remain cautious. 'With 60 per cent enriched uranium and a few hundred advanced centrifuges, Iran still has the capability to weaponise,' said Kelsey Davenport.Richard Nephew, a former US official on Iran policy, told Financial Times: 'It comes down to the material and where it is. On the basis of what we've seen at this point, we don't know where the material is. We don't have any real confidence that we've got the ability to get it any time soon.'US Secretary of State Marco Rubio admitted to CBS News, 'No one will know for sure for days' whether Iran managed to move the uranium.He added, 'I doubt they moved it because you really can't move anything right now. The minute a truck starts driving somewhere, the Israelis have seen it, and they've targeted it and taken it out.'But this contradicts what satellite images and intelligence officials suggest.Vice President JD Vance told ABC News that 'if the Iranians decide to expand this, then that's ultimately their decision. And the president of the United States will respond in kind.' He also stressed that Trump does not want 'a drawn-out conflict in the Middle East.'But the fact remains: Iran's uranium stockpile is missing.And while bombs have fallen, and statements made, one uncomfortable truth lingers.The most dangerous material in this crisis may still be out there—just hidden from view.
Hashtags

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


Time of India
41 minutes ago
- Time of India
Donald Trump's Nobel Peace Prize nomination in jeopardy after explosive fallout with Ukraine and Pakistan—what happens now?
Donald Trump has been formally nominated for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize, credited for helping negotiate a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. The nomination was submitted by U.S. Republican Congressman Buddy Carter, who described Trump's efforts as 'extraordinary and historic.' In his letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Carter highlighted Trump's role in halting a rapidly escalating conflict, saying the agreement 'offered the world a rare glimpse of hope.' Carter added that Trump's involvement required 'both courage and clarity,' and that the resulting ceasefire helped prevent what could have been a wider regional war in the Middle East. Ukrainian lawmaker withdraws support over Ukraine stance However, Trump's nomination has not been without controversy. Oleksandr Merezhko, a senior Ukrainian lawmaker who had earlier nominated Trump for the same prize, withdrew his support. Merezhko, who chairs Ukraine's parliamentary foreign affairs committee, told Newsweek he no longer believed Trump could deliver on his promise to end the Russia-Ukraine war. 'I have lost any sort of faith and belief in Trump and his ability to secure a ceasefire between Moscow and Kyiv,' he said. Merezhko also criticized Trump's reluctance to impose sanctions on Russia and described his response to recent missile attacks on Kyiv as 'appeasement.' In March, Ukraine accepted a U.S.-backed peace proposal, but Russia has not responded. Trump previously claimed he would end the conflict within 24 hours if re-elected. In May, he said, 'If Putin is stalling, we'll respond a little bit differently,' but did not follow up with action. Pakistan praises Trump, then Condemns US strikes Pakistan had initially expressed strong support for Trump's nomination. Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar credited him for reducing tensions between India and Pakistan and submitted a formal nomination. However, this endorsement was short-lived. A day after Trump's ceasefire announcement, he approved a U.S. strike on three Iranian nuclear sites. Pakistan's Foreign Ministry quickly responded with criticism, calling the military action 'deeply disturbing.' Ceasefire named '12-day war'; Trump voices disappointment The ceasefire between Israel and Iran, which Trump announced on a Monday, came just two days after the military action. He proposed naming the conflict the '12-Day War' and called the resolution a pivotal step toward avoiding broader violence in the region. Despite this, Trump expressed frustration over his past diplomatic efforts going unrecognized. On Truth Social, he said, 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do,' referencing previous attempts like the Abraham Accords and mediation efforts involving India-Pakistan and Serbia-Kosovo. Speaking to reporters, he added, 'I should have gotten it four or five times… They won't give me a Nobel Peace Prize because they only give it to liberals.' So far, only three U.S. presidents—Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, and Barack Obama—have received the Nobel nomination is official, but wavering international support and political criticism may complicate the path ahead.

Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Nouriel Roubini: Regime change in Iran could give peace a chance in West Asia
Nouriel Roubini Hostilities between Israel and Iran may be ending after sharp US intervention, but the Iranian regime has been shaken and may fall. Should it be replaced, not just the West, but the whole volatile region might be better off. Iranians have revolted against their regime before and when given the chance, they have always chosen moderate leaders over theocratic zealots. Gift this article Last November, I said that Israel was likely to attack Iran's nuclear and other military facilities, even go so far as to eliminate the 'regime's top military and political leaders." I also argued that 'any US administration would inevitably continue to support [Israel], directly or indirectly." Last November, I said that Israel was likely to attack Iran's nuclear and other military facilities, even go so far as to eliminate the 'regime's top military and political leaders." I also argued that 'any US administration would inevitably continue to support [Israel], directly or indirectly." Regardless of divisions in Tel Aviv about the conduct of war in Gaza, the broad consensus across the Israeli political spectrum— including centre-left critics of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—was that Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon, seen as an existential threat to Israel. Centrist leaders such as Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid criticized Netanyahu for being soft on Iran. It was only matter of time before Israel struck Iran, which, starting on 7 October 2023, had unleashed Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis and Shia militias in Syria and Iraq against Israel. After Tel Aviv decimated these proxies and Iran lost deterrence, Iran's only option was to gain nukes, an unacceptable outcome for Israel and the West broadly. Thus, Israel's attack against Iran. And since some of Iran's hardened nuclear facilities were robust enough to withstand Israeli weapons, it was clear that the US would intervene to destroy those units, despite the anti-interventionist sentiment of US President Donald Trump's political base. Iran counter-attacked Israel with missile barrages [and later fired at a US base in Qatar, causing no serious damage]. [Trump announced a ceasefire thereafter], but the Iranian regime is so weakened that it can barely defend itself, let alone [hurt the US]. Yes, some Shia militias may try to attack well-defended US bases and troops in the region. But, leaving aside the risk of even more forceful US and Israeli attacks, they cannot damage much. Also, the Iranian regime's ability and veiled willingness to block the Strait of Hormuz, mine the Gulf and/or attack the oil facilities and pipelines of its Arab neighbours is limited. The regime is focusing on its survival, but its collapse looks likely in the coming months. True, for now Israel's attack has led even the anti-regime opposition to rally around the flag. Over time, however, a large majority of Iranians who despise a regime that has brought about the country's economic ruin will rise against it and replace it with something else. In 1990, Iran's per capita GDP was almost equal to that of Israel; today, Israel's is nearly 15 times higher. Iran's energy reserves rival Saudi Arabia's, yet it has lost hundreds of billions of dollars in potential energy revenues in [fierce but futile] opposition to the West. Also Read: Israel-Iran conflict: Echoes of history haunt West Asia Today, Iranians face skyrocketing inflation, collapsing real incomes, mass poverty and even hunger not because of US and Western sanctions, but because of their rulers' policies. A country that could have been richer than any Gulf oil state is near bankruptcy, owing to the regime's corruption, incompetence and strategic recklessness. In addition to being a curse to its own people, the Islamic Republic has financed terror groups in West Asia for decades and caused state failure or semi-failure across the region: in Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, Gaza/Palestine and Iraq. Stabilization and recovery of the region's failing and failed states requires regime change in Iran. The Iranian people could trigger it over the next year. Iranians have revolted against their regime at least a half-dozen times in the last few decades, and, when given the chance, they have always chosen moderate leaders over theocratic zealots. Also Read: Javier Blas: An Israel-Iran war may not rattle the oil market For now, financial markets are correctly betting that the global impact of this recent war is likely to be minimal. Current movements of oil prices, US and global equities, US and global bond yields, and currencies suggest that a major stagflationary shock coming from a disruption of production and energy exports from the Gulf remains only a tail risk, not the baseline scenario. The 1973 Yom Kippur War and Iran's Islamic Revolution in 1979 led to a huge spike in oil prices that fuelled the severe stagflations of 1974-75 and 1980-82. This time is likely to be different: the energy input in consumption and production in oil-importing economies is much lower than in the 1970s; the US and other major new non-Opec energy producers have emerged; Saudi Arabia and others are able to tap large excess production capacity and inventories. And in case oil prices rise as US actions create new risks, various macro policies and other tools can be used to reduce the stagflationary impact. A nuclear Iran would have been a threat not just to Israel but all Sunni regimes in the region, as well as the West. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said what many world leaders think but don't want to admit in public: 'Israel is doing the dirty work for all of us." Even China and Russia have shown restraint. Radical forces have destabilized West Asia for decades, with spillover effects on the West. It took Israel to weaken and destroy Iran's proxies. Regime collapse in Iran may boost stability and allow for reconstruction, with diplomatic relations established between Israel and Saudi Arabia. A new government in Israel more open to peace with Palestinians and an eventual two-state solution will then be possible. But the Iranian Hydra needs to be replaced with a rational regime eager [for peace]. ©2025/Project Syndicate The author is professor emeritus of economics at New York University's Stern School of Business and author of 'MegaThreats: Ten Dangerous Trends That Imperil Our Future, and How to Survive Them'. Topics You May Be Interested In


Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Nearly 50 Vietnamese evacuated from Israel
Hanoi: Nearly 50 Vietnamese citizens have been evacuated from the conflict zone in Israel to Egypt, the state media reported on Wednesday. Several evacuees have already returned to Vietnam, while others are completing necessary procedures to repatriate as soon as possible, the Vietnamese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) said. The evacuation was carried out through coordinated efforts by the Vietnamese embassies in Israel and Egypt, Vietnam News Agency reported. The Vietnamese Embassy in Israel continues to advise citizens remaining in the conflict area to stay calm, maintain regular contact with the embassy, and strictly follow guidance and warnings issued by local authorities, MOFA and the embassy, Xinhua news agency reported. Meanwhile, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres welcomed US President Donald Trump's announcement of a ceasefire between Israel and Iran. Guterres urges Israel and Iran to fully respect the ceasefire and to stop fighting, noting that the people of the two countries have already suffered too much, said Stephane Dujarric, Guterres' spokesman. "The secretary-general hopes that this ceasefire can be replicated in the other conflicts in the region," said the spokesman on Tuesday. Earlier on Tuesday, US President Donald Trump declared that a ceasefire between Iran and Israel has officially taken effect, urging both sides to maintain restraint. "THE CEASEFIRE IS NOW IN EFFECT. PLEASE DO NOT VIOLATE IT! DONALD J. TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!" Trump posted on social media platform Truth Social. The announcement came amid escalating violence in the Middle East, but President Trump's declaration appeared to catch both parties off guard. The ceasefire claim was quickly contradicted by Iran, which asserted it had not received any formal proposal from Washington and had not agreed to a bilateral ceasefire. Earlier in the day, President Trump wrote, "Israel & Iran came to me, almost simultaneously, and said, 'Peace'! I knew the time was NOW. The World, and the Middle East, are the real winners!" "Both Nations will see tremendous love, peace and prosperity in their futures. They have so much to gain, and yet, so much to lose if they stray from the road of righteousness and truth. The future for Israel & Iran is unlimited, & filled with great promise. God bless you both!" he added. Earlier, Iran announced a unilateral halt to its military operations against Israel, effective 4 a.m. local time, but made it clear that the pause was conditional, based entirely on whether Israel would stop its own airstrikes and military actions.