 "‘Severe damage but not irreversible’: Decoding satellite images of US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites")
Contrary to President Donald Trump’s claim that US airstrikes “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear sites , satellite images have shown limited damage and not complete destruction.
The United States struck Iran’s nuclear sites at Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan with 30,000 pound ‘bunker buster’ bombs and submarine-launched Tomahawk missiles. The primary targets were underground enrichment facilities, stored enriched uranium, and centrifuges.
The satellite imagery from three sites struck by the United States indicates severe disturbance, but not irreversible damage, says Y Nithiyanandam, the Head of the Geospatial Research Programme at the Takshashila Institution.
Even as both Israel and the United States have claimed removing Iran’s nuclear capabilities, independent analysis of available evidence suggests the setback is only short-term.
High-resolution satellite imagery available so far shows clear above-ground damage, but there is no evidence yet of their impact on underground facilities, says Nithiyanandam.
ALSO READ: Inside Netanyahu’s campaign to destroy Iran’s bunker nuclear sites
Such an analysis is in line with the US Defense Intelligence Agency’s (DIA) assessment reported by CNN that said that US strikes did not destroy the core components of the Iranian nuclear programme located deep underground. The assessment further said that the stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed and centrifuges were also intact.
Despite such limited damage, Iran is unlikely to pivot to developing a nuclear weapon as a desperate attempt to restore deterrence as such capabilities are compromised by the Israeli air superiority and Israeli ability to strike at will anywhere inside Iran, according to Kabir Taneja, a scholar of West Asia and Deputy Director of Strategic Studies Programme at Observer Research Foundation (ORF).
Impact Shorts
More Shorts‘Severe but not irreversible damage’: Evidence contradicts Trump on US strikes
Of the three nuclear sites, Fordow was the one deemed most fortified. Estimates about its depth have ranged from 60-100 metres to half a mile underground.
The site is not located under dozens or hundreds of metres of soil, but solid concrete, which may only be penetrated by American 30,000-pound GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bombs, Daphne Richemond Barak, an Israeli specialist of underground warfare, previously told Firstpost.
The United States hit Fordow and Natanz sites with 14 such bombs. The evidence so far shows the results were moderate at best and underwhelming at worst.
“At Fordow, satellite imagery shows at least six crater-like holes in rugged mountain terrain near what is presumed to be the facility’s entrance. Additionally, Nasa’s Fire Information for Resource Management System (Firms) detected a significant heat signature approximately 3 kilometres north from potentially a detonation point that could have triggered a shock deep into the site,” says Nithiyanandam, the geospatial intelligence analyst at Takshashila.
If that explosion reached core structures, the operational disruption could be serious, though this remains speculative without internal visuals, says Nithiyanandam.
Similarly, above-ground damage is visible in satellite images in Isfahan, which is a continuation from previous Israeli strikes, and above-ground damage is also visible at the Natanz facility, but underground damage is not certain.
As for the Natanz site, Nithiyanandam says that two clear impacts are seen on open ground.
Nithiyanandam tells Firstpost, “One lies above the suspected location of the underground facility, suggesting a possible direct attempt to impair underground operations. However, without subsurface verification, it’s uncertain whether the internal systems were hit.”
Before and after satellite images captured on 15 and 22 June by Maxar Technologies show a 5.5-metre diameter crater directly over Iran's Natanz enrichment facility after US strikes.
— Shayan Sardarizadeh (@Shayan86) June 22, 2025
The site had been attacked twice before by Israel before a third strike by the US.
📷@Maxar pic.twitter.com/PnkEQGx7Db
Overall, Nithiyanandam says that considering the depth and design of these Iranian facilities, which were built to withstand attacks, it cannot be concluded from the evidence at hand that they have been permanently disabled.
Nithiyanandam further says, “The strikes likely caused operational pauses and forced emergency procedures, but whether the infrastructure is functionally neutralised requires ground-based inspections. As a geospatial analyst, I would say that the imagery indicates severe disturbance but not irreversible damage.”
Does non-irreversible damage mean US & Israel failed?
As the primary purpose of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel with the war on Iran was the decapitation of the country’s nuclear programme, the failure to neutralise nuclear capabilities would imply the war’s failure, but the reality is complicated.
There had long been fears —since before Israel went to war with Iran— that Iran could decide to develop a nuclear weapon to restore deterrence if its conventional capabilities would be eroded greatly. Now that Iran has its back completely pushed to the wall as its military has been hammered, air defences virtually destroyed, and leadership largely eliminated, concerns have risen that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei may finally give the go-ahead for the development of a nuclear weapon.
It would not be so simple, says Taneja, the West Asia scholar and Deputy Director of the Strategic Studies Programme at the think tank ORF.
Taneja tells Firstpost, “Iran is not going to continue with political or nuclear brinkmanship. Dialogue will be limited. They will rush to make the bomb if they can, but they have a very big problem in the form of Israeli air dominance across the country that will likely not allow such a development. If Israel is able to sustain the air dominance for a prolonged period of time and continue bombing Iran, it will be very difficult for Iran to develop the bomb — at least in the short term. As of now, Iran has no answer to Israeli airstrikes.”
In any case, the Iranian nuclear programme has been set back by at least two or two and a half years, says Taneja.
ALSO READ: As US joins Israel’s war against Iran, is Ayatollah’s time coming to end?
Such an outcome may be a good enough outcome for Israel, Barak, the Israeli underground warfare specialist, previously told Firstpost.
“In such a case, it might appear that Israel would have lost, but that would not be the case. Even without destroying Fordow, Israel has degraded Iran’s capabilities and set the Iranian nuclear programme back by many years. That is a good enough outcome for Israel short of complete destruction of nuclear capabilities,” said Barak, a professor of international relations at the Lauder School of Government, Diplomacy & Strategy at Israel’s Reichman University.
Instead of satellite imagery, the answer to whether the US strikes succeeded or how much they succeeded, may lie in the radiation detection around the sites struck, suggests Nithiyanandam.
Since the US strikes at the sites in Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan, no substantial radiation has been detected. Nithiyanandam says that could mean three things.
“It could mean one of three things. Firstly, the stockpiles were not at the targeted locations. Secondly, the stockpiles were not breached due to their secure underground positioning. Thirdly, the stockpiles were relocated in advance,” says Nithiyanandam.
The DIA assessment as reported by the CNN said that the stockpile of near-weapons grade uranium was moved out of the targeted sites and was not destroyed. If the assessment is correct, it would mean that the US and Israel war efforts indeed faltered in the main objective. But that might only be a tactical setback as Netanyahu and Trump have eyes on the bigger prize of the fall of Khamenei’s regime.
“Both Israel and the USA are serious about regime change or would like to be serious, but they cannot publicly and explicitly say it. If regime change happens, I think neither would have a problem. But President Trump is not going to purchase equity into that process. That would be a domestic disaster for him. I think the Israelis are more directly involved. Once again, he would rather have the Israelis do the dirty work while supporting them from behind than be in the forefront of any such adventure,” says Taneja.
 "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")
