In what was billed as the most aggressive direct U.S. military action against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure in over a decade, a series of coordinated airstrikes involving B-2 stealth bombers and GBU-57 “Massive Ordnance Penetrator” bombs—America’s most powerful bunker-buster weapon—struck key Iranian nuclear sites last weekend. Additionally, Tomahawk cruise missiles were launched from a U.S. guided missile submarine, creating what President Donald Trump called a “decisive obliteration” of Iran’s nuclear program.
However, a classified U.S. intelligence report now contradicts these celebratory claims. Leaked to U.S. media and authenticated by White House officials, the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment suggests the strike only achieved temporary setbacks—delaying Iran’s nuclear ambitions by a few months at most.
The dichotomy between political declarations and intelligence analysis has reignited global concern over the effectiveness of kinetic operations against nuclear facilities, Iran’s resilience, and the possibility that Tehran may have outwitted its adversaries well in advance.
On the night of June 21, three Iranian nuclear sites—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—were struck. The Pentagon confirmed the use of the GBU-57A/B bomb, capable of penetrating up to 200 feet of reinforced concrete, delivered by B-2 Spirit stealth bombers. Meanwhile, Tomahawk cruise missiles targeted surface infrastructure.
President Trump, on his social media platform Truth Social, was unequivocal: “THE NUCLEAR SITES IN IRAN ARE COMPLETELY DESTROYED!”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth echoed this sentiment: “Washington’s forces devastated the Iranian nuclear program. A textbook success.”
However, within 72 hours, a classified report leaked to The New York Times and Reuters contradicted these assertions. The DIA concluded that while ventilation shafts, above-ground facilities, and some access points were indeed destroyed, underground centrifuge halls remained structurally intact. In Fordow specifically, the entrances were sealed, but the subterranean components were largely undamaged.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, acknowledging the leak’s authenticity, called it “flat-out wrong” and part of a smear campaign against Trump. “The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission,” she posted on X (formerly Twitter).
According to Iranian officials, much of the enriched uranium stockpile had been relocated before the strikes. Hassan Abedini, deputy political head of Iran’s state broadcaster, stated, “The enriched uranium reserves had been transferred from the nuclear centres.”
Satellite imagery from Maxar Technologies dated June 19 appears to corroborate this claim. A convoy of 16 vehicles was observed departing the vicinity of Fordow just days before the strikes. Similar patterns were seen at Natanz and Isfahan.
Reports now suggest that Iran may have successfully smuggled out nearly 400 kg of highly enriched uranium (HEU), potentially to undisclosed, hardened sites beyond the reach of conventional munitions.
“This was not an act of desperation,” said Dr. Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group. “It appears to have been a calculated move, suggesting Iranian intelligence anticipated the strikes—or at the very least, was preparing for the possibility.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the strikes a “historic victory,” declaring that “we have thwarted Iran’s nuclear project.” He vowed continued vigilance, stating, “If anyone in Iran tries to rebuild it, we will act with the same determination.”
But nuclear proliferation analysts are less confident. Dr. Jeffrey Lewis of the Middlebury Institute told reporters, “If this ends here, it’s an incomplete strike. Today, Iran still has that material and we still don’t know where it is.”
He further noted that the enrichment plants—Fordow and Natanz—might be disabled, but the enormous underground facility near Natanz used for centrifuge production appeared untouched. “They didn’t even try to hit it.”
David Albright, founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, added that Iran could possess centrifuge arrays not housed in these three well-known facilities. “If they moved the uranium to a clandestine location, they could reach weapons-grade enrichment within weeks.”
Albright emphasized that reconstituting a nuclear weapons program is easier than building one from scratch. “The infrastructure and knowledge base are still intact.”
U.S. weapons used in the operation were the most advanced available: the GBU-57 weighs over 13,000 kg and can burrow into deep concrete layers before detonating. Yet Fordow is buried under 90 to 100 meters of rock, making it a formidable target.
Chinese analysts concur. Li Zixin of the China Institute of International Studies told Global Times, “Even with bunker-buster bombs, it would be very difficult to destroy the Fordow facility.” Zhang Junshe, a retired Chinese naval colonel, added, “The site is hardened against precisely this kind of attack.”
Dr. Lewis also pointed out that Iran’s engineers likely anticipated such strikes. “Iran’s ventilation shafts probably feature blast-trap designs to prevent explosive shockwaves from reaching sensitive equipment.”
Still, satellite images showed clear damage. At Fordow, six craters near shaft locations and debris clouds were visible. At Natanz, two large impact points atop underground halls and several above-ground buildings were destroyed. At Isfahan, 18 structures were damaged or destroyed, with scorched earth suggesting secondary explosions.
But as Vice President J.D. Vance admitted in an ABC interview: “I’m not exactly sure what the difference is between ‘severely damaged’ and ‘obliterated.’ But we don’t yet have full visibility.”
The strikes, occurring without international consensus, drew harsh criticism from Iran’s allies.
Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev posted on X:
“Critical infrastructure of the nuclear fuel cycle appears to have been unaffected or sustained only minor damage… The enrichment of nuclear material — and, now we can say it outright, the future production of nuclear weapons — will continue.”
He added ominously, “A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.”
While Medvedev is known for bombastic rhetoric, the suggestion of nuclear proliferation as retaliation is concerning. If Iran were to receive warheads from other powers, the global nonproliferation regime could collapse.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has monitored Iran’s program for decades, is effectively blind at this stage. Its director, Rafael Grossi, admitted: “No agency has access to the underground facilities to assess actual damage.” He warned that “significant damage is likely given the extreme vibration-sensitive nature of centrifuges.”
Still, he cautioned that without boots on the ground or intrusive surveillance, all assessments remain speculative.
Grossi’s tone highlights a dangerous truth: even the best surveillance satellites cannot penetrate meters of solid earth.
Though militarily impressive, the U.S. operation raises uncomfortable questions:
The strike likely delayed Iran’s program but failed to eliminate it. The risk now is that Iran accelerates its efforts covertly, without international oversight.
Tehran may now invest even more heavily in secrecy and dispersal. Hardened underground tunnels, mobile centrifuge arrays, and clandestine production are likely priorities.
By attacking nuclear infrastructure outside wartime, the U.S. may have established a dangerous norm. Future adversaries could follow suit.
Saudi Arabia and the UAE have remained quiet, but pressure may mount for them to pursue nuclear options of their own.
Experts agree that the Iranian nuclear program is damaged but not dead.
“If the goal was to eliminate Iran’s nuclear potential permanently, that has not been achieved,” said Dr. Lewis. “If the goal was to send a message—then message received. Loud and clear.”
In Washington, debate now centers on what further action, if any, should be taken. Hawks in Congress call for follow-up strikes. Doves urge diplomacy.
Vice President Vance summarized the uncertainty best: “We don’t yet know what was destroyed. We don’t yet know what was moved. We only know this: the nuclear question remains unanswered.”
And as Iran goes silent, the world waits—with more questions than answers.
The June 21 strike may go down as one of the most ambitious single-night operations in U.S. military history. Yet, its strategic value is in dispute. Bombs may have shaken the earth, but not Tehran’s resolve.
