Report Disputes Trump's Claims on Iranian Airstrike Success

A leaked Defense Intelligence Agency report is challenging President Donald Trump's assertion that recent U.S. airstrikes "completely and totally obliterated" three Iranian nuclear facilities. The report suggests the strikes only set back Iran's program by a few months. This report was published by multiple news outlets shortly after Trump approved the strikes amid rising tensions between Israel and Iran.

Following the operation, Trump declared the sites "completely and totally obliterated." However, members of the Trump administration have since attempted to discredit the initial report. Experts have stated that there is currently insufficient information to accurately determine the extent of the damage caused by the strikes.

Intelligence assessments are complex and time-consuming to complete. Dan Shapiro, a former deputy assistant secretary of Defense for the Middle East and U.S. ambassador to Israel, cautioned against overly optimistic or pessimistic assessments that emerge quickly. He noted that the initial DIA assessment was likely based on satellite imagery alone. A comprehensive assessment would require analyzing various intelligence sources, including signals intelligence, human intelligence, and potentially inspections by international agencies.

General Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, indicated that initial assessments suggested severe damage to all three sites, but a final assessment would take time. Media reports based on the DIA report indicated that Iran's enriched uranium stash was not destroyed. Other administration officials have pushed back on the DIA report's conclusions, citing the "low confidence" label.

The term "low confidence" is commonly used in initial assessments when conclusions are based on limited data. Retired Navy Rear Adm. Mark Montgomery explained that this label indicates the analyst's uncertainty about the assessment's accuracy, especially in quick assessments. Craig Singleton, also a senior fellow, added that low-confidence assessments are issued when key facts are unverified, prompting policymakers to seek more information.

Rob Greenway, a former deputy assistant to the president on Trump’s National Security Council, estimated that a more thorough and confident assessment would take one or two months. He also noted that the strikes were designed to cause underground damage, complicating the assessment process. The strikes by Israel on the same sites further complicate the analysis.

Greenway stated that the amount of ordnance used in the strikes, including large bombs, suggests that the targeted facilities are heavily compromised and likely no longer usable. Michael Allen, a former National Security Council senior director, believes that the intelligence picture will become clearer in the coming days.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt stated that the FBI is investigating the leak of the report, emphasizing that those responsible will be held accountable.