Iran's Nuclear Program: Destroyed or Days Away From Bomb Material?

Last June, Donald Trump declared victory. Operation Midnight Hammer had "obliterated" Iran's nuclear facilities, he said, bringing peace to the Middle East. Eight months later, his own officials can't seem to agree on what actually happened.

The Tale of Two Assessments

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, doubled down on Tuesday: the strikes were an "overwhelmingly successful mission" that destroyed Iran's nuclear program. She claimed this had been "verified" by both Trump and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

But just days earlier, Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff painted a dramatically different picture on Fox News. Iran, he said, is "probably a week away from having industrial-grade bomb-making material."

Same administration. Same intelligence briefings. Completely opposite conclusions.

The contradiction exposes a fundamental problem with the Trump administration's Iran strategy: if the nuclear facilities were truly obliterated, why are US and Iranian officials back at the negotiating table for the third time this year?

The Reality Behind the Rhetoric

The evidence suggests the truth lies somewhere between total destruction and imminent nuclear capability. Rafael Grossi, the IAEA chief, warned last year that Iran could resume uranium enrichment "in a matter of months" after the strikes. The Pentagon's own assessment was more modest: Iran's nuclear program was set back by one to two years.

Crucially, IAEA inspectors haven't been able to access Iranian nuclear sites since the US attack. Without verification, both the White House's claims of total destruction and Witkoff's warnings of imminent capability remain just that—claims.

Before the June 2025 war, Iran was enriching uranium at 60 percent purity—far above the 3.67 percent allowed under the original nuclear deal, but well below the 90 percent needed for weapons-grade material.

Déjà Vu All Over Again

The current impasse feels eerily familiar. In 2018, Trump withdrew from the multilateral nuclear agreement and imposed "maximum pressure" sanctions. Iran's response? It escalated its nuclear program to unprecedented levels.

Now, Iran is offering to limit enrichment to minimal levels under IAEA supervision in exchange for sanctions relief. Trump, however, is demanding "zero enrichment"—a position that essentially asks Iran to abandon its legal right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Meanwhile, the US continues to amass military assets near Iran, with Leavitt confirming that "lethal force" remains an option if diplomacy fails.

The Information Wars

The conflicting assessments reveal something deeper about modern geopolitics: the weaponization of information itself. In an era where intelligence can be selectively declassified and strategically leaked, distinguishing between genuine threats and political posturing becomes increasingly difficult.

For regional allies like Israel and Saudi Arabia, the mixed messages create strategic uncertainty. For Iran, they provide both a pretext for continued nuclear development and an opportunity to portray the US as an unreliable negotiating partner.