Trump likens Iran airstrikes to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, says 'nuclear programme set back by decades'

President Donald Trump on Wednesday doubled down on his assertion that the United States had dealt a massive blow to Iran’s nuclear programme through recent airstrikes, claiming that Tehran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons had been pushed back by decades.

Speaking at the NATO Summit in the Netherlands, Trump said the US strikes resulted in “total obliteration” at Iran’s key nuclear sites, adding that “they’re not going to be building bombs for a long time.”

Trump also insisted that a ceasefire between Iran and Israel was holding well, and compared the outcome of the June 22 airstrikes to the decisive end of World War II, when the US dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. “That ended the war,” he said. “I don’t want to use the example of Hiroshima, I don’t want to use the example of Nagasaki—but that was essentially the same thing.”

More from World

How much damage did US strikes on Iran cause? It depends on who you ask From proxy war to direct conflict: New strategic era in West Asia

Despite reports questioning the extent of damage inflicted on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, Trump rejected any such doubts, branding them “fake news.” He lashed out at CNN and The New York Times for reporting that Iran’s programme remained largely intact, posting in all caps on Truth Social that the nuclear sites had been “completely destroyed.”

Trump’s comments were aimed at countering a CNN report based on an assessment by the Pentagon’s Defence Intelligence Agency. The classified review indicated that while some Iranian nuclear sites were damaged, others remained operational or were protected before the strikes. The report also said that key equipment, such as centrifuges and uranium stockpiles, had not been fully destroyed.

Quick Reads

View All

EU–India free trade deal a 'geopolitical stabiliser,' largest in world and boosts economy and security: Costa

‘It’s no secret’: Russia says Ukraine must cede all of Donbas for truce as part of Putin-Trump formula

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed the Pentagon assessment as “flat-out wrong” and defended the mission’s success. “When you drop fourteen 30,000-pound bombs directly on target, the result is total obliteration,” she said.

What the US believes it achieved

Vice President JD Vance echoed the administration’s view in a Fox News interview, saying that while Iran still possesses enriched uranium—roughly 408.6 kilograms at 60% purity—it has lost the technical capacity to further enrich it to weapons-grade levels or convert it into a nuclear weapon. “That is mission success,” Vance said.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), about 42 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60% can be further processed into weapons-grade material sufficient for one nuclear bomb. The U.S. believes that by destroying infrastructure essential for that final enrichment and weaponisation, it has neutralised Iran’s nuclear threat—for now.

Iran’s preparations and evasive measures

Ahead of the strikes, Iran took steps to protect its nuclear assets. On June 13, a day after Israel launched its own campaign against Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi informed IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi that Iran would take “special measures” to safeguard its nuclear equipment.

Satellite images from Maxar Technologies showed activity at the Fordo nuclear site starting June 19, three days before the U.S. attack. Trucks and bulldozers were seen transporting dirt, which was later used to seal entrances to underground tunnels—possibly shielding the site’s contents from destruction.

Stephen Wood, senior director at Maxar, said these trucks might have been involved in removing enriched uranium stockpiles or sensitive equipment before the strikes. Former U.S. intelligence analyst Eric Brewer also suggested Iran could have relocated enriched uranium or delicate centrifuges—although the latter would have been harder to transport without damage.

Long-term nuclear capability not eliminated

While the airstrikes appear to have dealt a blow to Iran’s declared nuclear facilities, experts caution that Iran may retain enough resources to rebuild a covert programme. Over the last four years, Tehran has produced advanced centrifuges beyond the IAEA’s monitoring scope. On June 12, Iran also announced the construction of a third enrichment plant in Isfahan—though it’s unclear how functional it remains following Israeli and American strikes.

Brewer warned that even with partial losses, Iran still has a strong foundation for rebuilding its nuclear capabilities. “They’ve lost equipment and possibly personnel, but they haven’t lost everything,” he said. If centrifuges were diverted in advance, Iran could, in theory, construct a small-scale, hidden enrichment site and reach weapons-grade enrichment quickly.

Kelsey Davenport of the Arms Control Association echoed this concern. She noted that if Iran still possesses 60% enriched uranium and operational centrifuges, it could restart enrichment activities covertly and accelerate toward a nuclear weapon.

Still, any new nuclear project would now begin at a disadvantage. Experts agree that Israeli and American operations have at least temporarily weakened Iran’s nuclear infrastructure—though not decisively ended the threat.

With inputs from agencies