There have been struggles in the Trump administration to persuade skeptics regarding claims about a U.S. attack on Iran, particularly in its aim to dismantle the country’s nuclear ambitions.
In the past couple of days, a key question has lingered amidst heated Pentagon press conferences and classified briefings: how has Iran’s nuclear program been affected?
In a conversation with a reporter on Friday, Trump claimed that evidence supports his assertions about Iran’s nuclear site being “proven.” He stated, “It’s been wiped out. It’ll take years for them to start,” and noted that the Iranians are “weary, and the last thing they think is the nucleus.”
However, congressional lawmakers appeared skeptical.
During testimony to both the Senate and the House, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and other intelligence officials detailed the strike from June 21 at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, Natanz Enrichment Complex, and the Isfahan nuclear site.
Democrats, present at the briefing which also included Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegses, voiced concerns that major questions about the extent of Iran’s uranium stockpile and how quickly they could recover their nuclear program remained unanswered.
While it’s acknowledged that the airstrike caused significant damage to Iran’s uranium enrichment infrastructure, lawmakers found little evidence suggesting the attack would impede Tehran’s future efforts in nuclear weapons production.
Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif) remarked on ABC News Live that it’s “premature” to declare that Iran won’t continue its nuclear initiatives, citing “too many unknowns.”
Democratic whip Rep. Katherine Clark from Massachusetts expressed dissatisfaction with the briefing on Friday, stating that it left her with “more concerns and true clarity about how we define our mission and how we define its success.”
Former nuclear physicist, Rep. Bill Foster (D-Ill.) pointed out that there was no confirmation that the bombings eliminated Iran’s existing supplies of enriched uranium, warning that if left untouched, Iran could potentially produce weapons similar to those used in Hiroshima in a very short time frame.
This week, Trump administration officials altered their tone, suggesting the effects of the attack would last for months instead of years, contrary to Trump’s earlier claims.
The Defense Intelligence Agency reported that a large number of bombs dropped on the Fordow site resulted in significant damage, but much of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile had remained intact before the attack.
In response to media reports, Trump adopted a confrontational stance, implying that people within U.S. intelligence were speculating about the damage caused to Iran’s nuclear capabilities. He also criticized reporters who acquired certain reports.
The DIA’s evaluation and subsequent media narratives prompted Defense Secretary Hegses to hold a rare press conference, during which he condemned the media’s portrayal of “the most secret and complicated military strike in history.”
Nevertheless, Hegses and Kane did not provide any new assessments of the actual effects on Tehran’s nuclear agenda, instead focusing on the technical aspects of the military operation.
“You want to call it destroyed, you want to call it defeat, you want to call it erased, choose your words,” Hegses stated.
He also dismissed questions regarding whether Iran had moved concentrated uranium out of the Fordow site prior to the airstrike, stating he was “unaware” of any intelligence indicating that it had been relocated.
Satellite images revealed that vehicles were present at Fordow shortly before the bombing, and experts suggested that some enriched uranium may have been moved beforehand.
Following a classified Senate briefing, several Democrats noted that the intelligence contradicted the White House’s assertions of success.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) emphasized, “The point is, we don’t know,” claiming that anyone who asserts certainty is misrepresenting the situation because there has been no final assessment of battle damage.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) accused Trump of misleading the public by stating that the U.S. had destroyed Iran’s nuclear program, asserting, “Nothing I’ve seen or heard has changed my belief that it only retreated the program for a few months.”
Even some of Trump’s supporters hesitated to fully back the narrative that Iran had ceased its nuclear operations. One remarked, “The program has been wiped out on these three sites, but there are still ambitions. They’ve been wiped out today, but you can reconfigure them.”
He raised doubts over whether the substantial amounts of enriched uranium, believed to have been moved before the airstrike, were destroyed, indicating this wasn’t a primary target.
Senator Tom Cotton acknowledged that the mission did not aim to eliminate Iran’s entire stockpile of enriched uranium, stating that “destroying all the enriched uranium and stopping it was not part of the mission.”
Foster argued that this aspect should be central to U.S. efforts. “From the start, the goal of this mission was to secure or destroy that material,” he stated after a House briefing. “That’s where they hide the ball, and that’s what we have to keep an eye on.”
