 "Did US strikes destroy Iran’s nuclear sites? Can it still build a nuclear bomb?")
“Totally obliterated.”
“Monumental Damage.”
“Hits were hard and accurate.”
These are just some of the ways US President Donald Trump has described the American strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites and the outcome of the American military action. On Sunday (June 22), the US president waded into Israel’s war against Iran and triggered a more dangerous phase in the conflict when it struck three key nuclear sites in Iran — Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan.
Following America’s strikes, dubbed Operation Midnight Hammer, Iran downplayed the damage to the nuclear sites – just as they did when Israel first struck Iran’s facilities on June 13. Independent experts are still analysing commercial satellite imagery to ascertain the true impact of the US strikes, but some note that while the sites may have suffered extensive damage, Iran’s nuclear programme is far from dead and buried.
Here’s what we have learnt so far.
US takes aim at Iran’s nuclear sites
In the wee hours of Sunday, Trump told the world from the White House that it had hit Fordow , Iran’s most important nuclear enrichment facility, buried deep inside a mountain to guard it from attacks, Natanz, which is Iran’s largest nuclear enrichment centre, and Isfahan, home to the country’s largest nuclear research complex.
To carry out these strikes, America used the dangerous bunker-buster bombs as well as Tomahawk missiles.
Trump later said, “Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.”
This claim was later reasserted by US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth in a Pentagon press briefing. “It was an incredible and overwhelming success. The order we received from our commander in chief was focused,” said Hegseth.
He further added, “Thanks to President Trump’s bold and visionary leadership and his commitment to peace through strength, Iran’s nuclear ambitions have been obliterated. The operation President Trump planned was bold and it was brilliant.”
Assessing the extent of the damage
While Trump and Hegseth have claimed that Iran’s nuclear sites have been “totally obliterated”, General Dan Caine, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was more measured in his response, telling the media that the true extent of the damage caused to Iran’s nuclear sites would only be known in a few weeks’ time. However, he did mention that “initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction”.
And satellite imagery and independent analysts agree with this sentiment.
Visuals of the Fordow site after the US’ bombing shows some holes in the mountain above it, which may be consistent with damage. A senior US official told the New York Times that the American strike on the Fordow site did not destroy the heavily fortified facility but said the strike had severely damaged it, taking it “off the table.”
In fact, an Iranian official was also quoted as saying that the site had been evacuated “a long time ago” in anticipation of attacks.
Michael Horowitz, a Middle East-based geopolitical analyst, trying to ascertain the damage told Wall Street Journal, “It is very hard to tell whether the strike was successful or not. What I can say is that the US appears to have specifically targeted weak spots within Fordow, namely ventilation shafts that were covered with rocks to protect them. I would expect that this was done in an effort to maximise the chance of success.”
The Americans also struck Natanz with a US official saying a B-2 bomber had dropped two bunker-busting bombs on the site. Satellite imagery shows two new craters at the site, likely caused by the bunker-busting bombs. The craters — one with a diameter of around 5.5 metres, the other around 3.2 metres, according to the Maxar images — sit directly above parts of the complex located underground. However, the extent of damage underground is still to be determined.
At Isfahan, the US used Tomahawk missiles. Satellite photos show at least 18 partially destroyed structures at the site. Moreover, images reveal visible black spots at the site.
The Institute for Science and International Security said that the Isfahan facility had been “heavily damaged”, adding that the complex’s main uranium conversion facility, which converts natural uranium into the form of uranium entered into gas centrifuges, was “severely damaged.”
But despite the damage at the nuclear sites, there hasn’t been any reports of a radiation leak . Reza Kardan, the deputy director of the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran and the head of the National Nuclear Safety System Center in the country was quoted as saying that “no radiation contamination or nuclear radiation has been observed outside” the sites.
“Preliminary plans had been made and measures had been taken to protect the safety and health of the dear people of the country, and despite the criminal actions this morning in attacking nuclear facilities, due to the previously planned measures and the measures taken, no radiation contamination or nuclear radiation has been observed outside these sites and facilities,” Kardan said.
Even the UN nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said the radiation levels near targeted sites had not increased. “Following attacks on three nuclear sites in Iran – including Fordow – the IAEA can confirm that no increase in off-site radiation levels has been reported as of this time,” the agency said in a social media post on Sunday.
Future of Iran’s nuclear programme
But what does all this mean for Iran’s nuclear ambitions? Has the US effectively made it impossible for Tehran to build a nuclear weapon?
Experts note that only a complete picture of the overall damage would determine if Tehran’s nuclear ambitions have been nullified. Clionadh Raleigh, head of the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project (ACLED), a conflict-monitoring group, told The Telegraph that although the strikes might alter the timeline of Iran’s nuclear programme, they would do little to alter its ultimate trajectory.
“The regime’s broader power and intentions are likely to remain intact,” said Raleigh. “Iran’s military and intelligence systems are designed and built to survive. The structure is deeply layered and resistant to collapse. Even if key infrastructure is destroyed, the system adapts – and in some cases, becomes more dangerous in the process.
“There’s no evidence that the strikes will permanently end Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capabilities. What they may do is shift the timeline.”
Darya Dolzikova, Senior Research Fellow, Proliferation and Nuclear Policy, also agreed with this assessment. She noted, “The fundamental reality remains that military action alone can only roll back the programme by degrees, not eliminate it fully.
“Iran retains extensive expertise that will allow it to eventually reconstitute what aspects of the programme have been damaged or destroyed. The Iranian nuclear programme is decades old and draws on extensive Iranian indigenous expertise. The physical elimination of the programme’s infrastructure - and even the assassination of Iranian scientists - will not be sufficient to destroy the latent knowledge that exists in the country.”
Other experts also speculated that Iran had moved its enriched uranium out of these sites, which means that their nuclear ambitions remain alive. David Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International Security, was quoted as saying, “There were trucks seen in imagery apparently hauling stuff away. One would assume that any enriched uranium stocks were hauled away.”
Ian Stewart, a former UK Ministry of Defence specialist and now director of the James Martin Centre for Nonproliferation Studies at the Middlebury Institute in the United States, also stated that the key to Iran’s nuclear plans is the enriched uranium. In a Times report, he said that the enriched uranium is the “most valuable asset in Iran right now”.
With inputs from agencies
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
 "Russian drones over Poland: Trump’s tepid reaction a wake-up call for Nato?")
 "As Russia pushes east, Ukraine faces mounting pressure to defend its heartland")
 "Why Mossad was not on board with Israel’s strike on Hamas in Qatar")
 "Turkey: Erdogan's police arrest opposition mayor Hasan Mutlu, dozens officials in corruption probe")
