U.S. intelligence assessments released recently reveal that recent American airstrikes against Iranian nuclear facilities only had limited effects, raising further doubts over military options for curbing Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
According to a report compiled and shared with senior congressional leaders this week by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI), key components of Iran’s uranium enrichment infrastructure survived recent strikes, providing evidence that its capacity remains to resume high-level enrichment operations more quickly than expected and rebuild damaged facilities quicker.
Operation Midnight Hammer was launched by the U.S. on June 10, targeting Iran’s major nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. The Pentagon claimed Operation Midnight Hammer had successfully set back Iran’s nuclear program by at least two years.
However, ODNI’s findings paint a different picture. While some enrichment halls and surface facilities suffered visible damage from strikes on Iran, its most advanced centrifuges had apparently been relocated into hardened underground bunkers which had not been completely destroyed; additionally satellite and cyber intelligence shows Iranian technicians resumed partial enrichment operations within days after strikes had taken place.
“The strikes were tactically successful but strategically inconclusive,” according to an anonymous senior intelligence official familiar with the report. Iran prepared for an attack and took measures to minimize long-term disruption.
This report has ignited a heated political discussion in Washington. While the Biden administration stands by their decision to launch strikes against Iran, lawmakers from both parties are demanding a review of U.S. strategy towards Iran.
Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called for greater transparency in foreign relations policymaking. Americans deserve to know whether our actions are producing their desired results or just increasing tensions,” he noted. If Iran remains capable of developing weapons capable of deterrence capabilities then we need an approach which combines diplomacy and deterrence simultaneously.
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), on the other hand, sharply criticized what he termed as an inadequate response. According to Graham, strikes were too limited in scope and ambition to deliver a decisive blow against Iran.
The White House has not directly responded to this report; however, further intelligence analyses are being conducted. According to National Security Council officials, however, a comprehensive containment strategy consisting of cyber operations, economic sanctions, and multilateral pressure remains in effect.
Iranian officials remain defiant. State media reported that Iran’s nuclear program will proceed “uninterrupted”, while Iran’s Supreme National Security Council accused America of engaging in “an act of futile aggression.”
Independent analysts note that while this report may shed light on operational gaps, it also illustrates the difficulty associated with dismantling nuclear capabilities with force alone.
“The intelligence community has reiterated what many have long argued–military strikes may only delay but cannot permanently cripple a nuclear program,” according to Dr. Dalia Kaye, senior fellow at RAND Corporation.
As diplomatic efforts stall and regional tensions heighten, this report adds urgency to the question of whether a sustainable solution to Iran’s nuclear challenge can be found.