Latest news with #USAirstrikes
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
US air strikes on Iran were absolutely necessary, says Patel
Dame Priti Patel has urged ministers to 'come off the fence' over whether US air strikes on Iran 'were absolutely necessary' earlier this summer. The Conservative frontbencher pressed Foreign Office minister Hamish Falconer for details about the 'UK's response to the actions of the Iranian regime' in the Commons on Monday. It followed Operation Midnight Hammer last month, an air raid when US defence forces attacked Iranian nuclear sites near Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan. UK Attorney General Lord Hermer is reported to have raised legal concerns about any potential British involvement in the conflict beyond defending its allies. 'Two weeks have passed since the US air strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities,' shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti said. 'Does the minister have an assessment of their impact, and what is his response to the Iranian regime now prohibiting co-operation with the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) and their inspectors leaving Iran? 'Given Tehran's refusal to co-operate, is the minister and the department in discussions with the partners about snapback sanctions being applied (by reinstating UN sanctions on Iran removed through the 2015 Iran nuclear deal) and other measures? 'Is he concerned that demonstrates that Iran will continue to pursue nuclear weapons and their entire programme? 'And with the information received from discussions with America, Israel and other intelligence partners, will the Government finally come off the fence about those strikes and agree with this side of the House that they were absolutely necessary?' Mr Falconer replied: 'I won't provide, I'm afraid, a detailed commentary from the despatch box on the extent of damage from the strikes, for reasons that I'm sure (Dame Priti) and the rest of the House will understand. 'I can confirm we are in discussions about the snapback mechanisms. As the Prime Minister (Sir Keir Starmer) has said, as the Foreign Secretary (David Lammy) has said, as I have said, we cannot see Iran get a nuclear weapon – snapback is an important lever. 'We're talking with our E3 partners and indeed the Americans about what role snapback can play. 'We hope to see a diplomatic solution. That is ultimately the most enduring way to ensure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon, but we will continue to consider all diplomatic tools including snapback.' Andrew Murrison referred to comments which Defence Secretary John Healey made on social media website X, when the Cabinet minister said the 'US has taken action to alleviate the grave threat that Iran poses to global security'. The Conservative MP for South West Wiltshire told the Commons: 'The Defence Secretary correctly has said that Operation Midnight Hammer has alleviated a grave threat, but the Attorney General appears to be less clear and wonders if it was illegal, whilst the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary appear to sit on the fence. 'Sorry to put the minister on the spot – does he agree with the Attorney General or with the Defence Secretary?' Mr Falconer replied: 'The Defence Secretary and the Attorney General are doing rather different roles, and I don't think they're in disagreement – and in any case, collective responsibility would bind them both and indeed me.' The Foreign Office minister, whose portfolio includes the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan, also referred to a 'gap' in the law which independent reviewer of state threats legislation Jonathan Hall identified in a 2025 report. Mr Hall recommended that the Government should be able to issue 'statutory alert and liability threat notices' against foreign intelligence services. 'By way of example, this strong power would be available for use against the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps', he wrote, referring to the Iran-backed organisation. It would be a 'new proscription-type power', similar to existing terrorism legislation used to ban organisations such as Hamas and National Action, the reviewer said. When Labour MP for Newcastle-under-Lyme Adam Jogee asked Mr Falconer to 'elaborate a little more on what that means', the minister replied: 'A state in this case has proved a persistent threat in the UK using methods unlike those usually employed by a state.' He said the Government was 'seeking to fill' the gap in the law.
The Independent
30-06-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
New satellite images show work at Iran's Fordow nuclear site after US bombing
Satellite pictures taken in the week after the US airstrikes on Iran's three nuclear sites show activity at the Fordow facility, which Donald Trump claimed was 'completely and totally obliterated' in last week's attack. Images from Maxar Technologies show construction vehicles including an excavator near one of the shafts at the Fordow nuclear facility which was struck by US bunker buster bombs on 22 June. Other images show that the bombardment had completely caved in entrance tunnels to the site. The images show several vehicles parked around the facility, as questions remain about just how much of Iran's nuclear capability was obliterated. The US Secretary of Defense hit out at media reporting of the attack, after a leaked preliminary intelligence report found the attack had likely only set Iran's nuclear programme back by a couple of months. Speaking at the Pentagon alongside the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff late last week, Pete Hegseth said 'anyone with two eyes' would recognise the damage done to Iran's facilities. 'First reports are almost always wrong. They're almost always incomplete,' he said, adding the facility had been completely 'destroyed'. Hegseth cited several experts and other reports to back his claim up, including the Israeli Defence Force, the CIA director, US director of national intelligence. He also quoted Iran's foreign ministry spokesperson as saying 'our nuclear institutions have been badly damaged, that's for sure'. General Dan Caine said the bunker-buster bombs 'went exactly where they were intended to go'. But on Sunday, the head of the UN's nuclear watchdog suggested Tehran could get its nuclear programme back up and running within months. The International Atomic Energy Agency director general Rafael Grossi previously said Iran had told the watchdog it was planning to move its enriched uranium ahead of a suspected bomb attack, and that it was unclear whether that fuel had been destroyed in the bombardment. "So some could have been destroyed as part of the attack, but some could have been moved," he said in an interview on Sunday. Israel launched an attack on Iran earlier this month, saying Tehran was on the brink of developing nuclear weapons. It sparked a 12-day war, with Iran launching missiles at Israeli cities including Tel Aviv, before the US joined in with the nuclear site attacks. Mr Grossi said the strikes on sites in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan had significantly set back Iran's ability to convert and enrich uranium, but the country still has capacity. "They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that," Grossi told CBS News in an interview. "Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there," he added, according to the transcript of the interview. Western powers stress that Iran's nuclear advances provide it with an irreversible knowledge gain, suggesting that while losing experts or facilities may slow progress, the advances are permanent. "Iran is a very sophisticated country in terms of nuclear technology," Grossi said. "So you cannot disinvent this. You cannot undo the knowledge that you have or the capacities that you have."
CBS News
30-06-2025
- Politics
- CBS News
Nuclear watchdog agency's general director says Iran's capabilities suffered "severe damage"
Iran's nuclear capabilities suffered "severe damage" in last week's U.S. airstrikes but not "total damage," said the man in charge of the world's global nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency. "One cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there." "It is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage, first of all," IAEA director general Rafael Mariano Grossi said on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan." "And secondly, Iran has the capacities there; industrial and technological capacities. So if they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again." The U.S. launched three strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities on June 21, following more than a week of Israeli attacks, which President Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said had "obliterated" Iran's nuclear facilities. But Grossi's comments appeared to support an early assessment by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), which suggested the strikes had only set back Iran's nuclear program by months. The Trump administration has slammed the DIA's assessment as "low confidence," and Hegseth and other officials on Thursday went after the media for reporting on a "leaked" report. At a briefing Thursday, reporters questioned Hegseth repeatedly on whether Iran had moved its stocks of enriched uranium before the Israeli and U.S. strikes began. The defense secretary responded that he was "not aware of any intelligence that I've reviewed that says things were not where they were supposed to be — moved or otherwise." Grossi on Sunday said Iran did not share that they had any plans to move the enriched uranium, but at the same time "there was no physical time" for Iran to share that information. The IAEA director general also conceded that it's "logical to presume that when [Iran] announce[s] that they are going to be taking protective measures" that moving the enriched uranium "could be part of it." But he also emphasized that "this is why it's so important, first of all, for Iran to allow our inspectors to continue their indispensable work as soon as possible." Brennan pushed Grossi that since it's unclear if the uranium had been moved and all the centrifuges cannot be accounted for, there's an open question that Iran could still "sprint towards a bomb…if they wanted to." Grossi said he didn't want to be an "alarmist," but "we need to be in a position to ascertain, to confirm what is there, and where is it and what happened." "Iran had a very vast ambitious program, and part of it may still be there, and if not, there is also the self-evident truth that the knowledge is there," Grossi said. "The industrial capacity is there. Iran is a very sophisticated country in terms of nuclear technology, as is obvious. So you cannot disinvent this. You cannot undo the knowledge that you have or the capacities that you have. It's a huge country, isn't it? So I think this should be the incentive that we all must have to understand that military operations or not, you are not going to solve this in a definitive way militarily." Grossi confirmed that his IAEA inspectors were never able to verify Iran's claims that its nuclear program was only for peaceful ends and that it was not trying to develop a weapon. "We didn't see a program that was aiming in that direction, but at the same time, they were not answering very, very important questions that were pending," Grossi said. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement Saturday that there were calls in Iran for the arrest and execution of Grossi. When asked about alleged threats against nuclear inspectors, Iran's ambassador to the UN, Amir Saeid Iravani, said in a separate appearance on "Face the Nation" that Iran is not threatening nuclear inspectors, including Grossi. Nuclear inspectors "are in Iran," Iravani said. He said they are in a "safe condition," but "they cannot have access to our site." Iravani also said that since Iran is a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), nuclear "enrichment is our right, and an inalienable right, and we want to implement this right." Iravani added that he did not think the enrichment will "ever stop."
The Independent
29-06-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
UN watchdog and intercepted Iran call undermine Trump's boasts about ending nuke program
Two more blows were dealt on Sunday to the Donald Trump administration image of ruination that supposedly befell Iran's nuclear program as a result of U.S. airstrikes. First, a top official with the United Nations's nuclear watchdog told CBS News that Iran's production capabilities would be able to enrich weapons-grade uranium within a few months, in the event Iran's government orders production of a nuclear-tipped missile. Then, The Washington Post revealed that U.S. intelligence sources intercepted a call between top Iranian officials commenting on the strikes and describing them as less destructive than Tehran was expecting. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt fired back personally in a statement: 'It's shameful that The Washington Post is helping people commit felonies by publishing out-of-context leaks. The notion that unnamed Iranian officials know what happened under hundreds of feet of rubble is nonsense. Their nuclear weapons program is over.' The Independent reached out Sunday for further comment. The administration spun a narrative of total annihilation to describe the extent of damage to Iran's nuclear program this past week after the president ordered strikes on three Iranian facilities on June 21. An initial U.S. intelligence assessment was leaked to the press and caused headaches for the administration as it claimed that Iran's stockpile of uranium was not hit during the attack and that centrifuges at the three sites were mostly intact following the strikes. Officials including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth angrily scolded reporters after publication of the assessment, which they blamed on an effort to make the president look bad. But questions remain about key parts of the nuclear weapons development process in Iran — including, most crucially, whether the full extent of Iran's nuclear and arms production sites have actually been identified. On Sunday, International Atomic Energy Agency director Rafael Grossi told CBS News that Iran could be producing enriched uranium within a matter of months, explaining that the country's nuclear program did not suffer 'total' destruction — as President Donald Trump explicitly claimed multiple times this past week, and again on Sunday. 'It is clear that there has been severe damage, but it's not total damage, first of all,' Gross saidi. 'And secondly, Iran has the capacities there; industrial and technological capacities. So if they so wish, they will be able to start doing this again.' But neither Grossi nor The Washington Post 's reporting contradicted one crucial aspect of the intelligence CIA Director John Ratcliffe briefed members of Congress on this past week. Ratcliffe and the U.S. intelligence community maintain that Iran's metal conversion operations centered at Isfahan were wholly or near-completely destroyed, a setback that Ratcliffe maintained this past week would delay Tehran's progress on nuclear weapons development for years, not months. The plants are used for fabricating enriched uranium into metal, a final step in the process before it is ready for testing and use inside of an operational nuclear missile. Isfahan was the only known facility inside Iran conducting this process. An administration official told The Post that the destruction of those capabilities proved that the depiction of events on the intercepted call was 'wrong', adding: 'We know that our weapons were delivered precisely where we wanted them to be delivered and they had the effect that we wanted.' The CIA director also told Congress that U.S. intelligence believes that the vast majority of Iran's enriched uranium was hit during the attack and is now 'buried' at Fordow. Grossi, meanwhile, maintained that it was possible Iran had moved the stockpile. The Times of Israel reported one expert as saying that it was a credible possibility for Iran to have another hidden metal conversion site. Israeli intelligence also concluded that the Iranian program was set back by 'years' due to the extent of the damage, according to The Times of Israel.
Yahoo
29-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
UN watchdog: Iran nuclear program ‘suffered enormous damage'
Iran's nuclear facilities 'suffered enormous damage' from the U.S. airstrikes Saturday, but more extensive evaluation is needed, the head of the United Nations's nuclear watchdog said Thursday. 'I think 'annihilated' is too much, but it has suffered enormous damage,' International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director Rafael Grossi told French broadcaster RFI. 'I know there's a lot of debate about the degree of annihilation, total destruction, and so on, what I can tell you, and I think everyone agrees on this, is that very considerable damage has been done.' 'Obviously, you have to go to the site and that is not easy, there is debris and it is no longer an operational facility,' he added. President Trump has maintained the three sites targeted were 'completely and totally obliterated,' but reports this week, based on an initial U.S. intelligence analysis, raised questions about the severity of the damage. Trump said the strikes set Iran's nuclear capabilities back by 'decades,' but Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei denied that the damage was that significant during his first public remarks on the bombings Thursday. 'They could not achieve anything significant,' Khamenei said in a 10-minute recorded statement. Grossi declined to speculate on the extent of the blow to Iran's overall nuclear capabilities by the U.S. bombings of the Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan enrichment sites. 'It is true that with its reduced capabilities, it will be much more difficult for Iran to continue at the same pace as before,' he said. 'But what the president's statement implies is a military objective and that, as you know, is a matter of intent — it is subjective.' 'We do not judge intentions, we analyze and evaluate what we see on the ground,' the watchdog chief added. Grossi reached out to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi about resuming the watchdog's evaluations, which were being conducted in a limited capacity before Israel launched its surprise attack on Tehran's nuclear and military sites on June 12. He said he has not heard back. 'Obviously, there is some tension at the moment,' the IAEA leader added. 'There are political voices in Iran who believe that the agency has not been impartial.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
