How badly damaged is Iran's nuclear programme? Here's the evidence

Telegraph

2 days ago

After the dust from the bombs and missiles settled, a war of words and a quest for the truth began.
Donald Trump triumphantly claimed that America 'obliterated' Iran's nuclear programme, after striking three sites with GBU-57 bunker busting bombs and tomahawk missiles, setting it back 'basically decades'.
But Ali Khamenei, Iran's supreme leader, said: 'The Americans were unable to accomplish anything significant.'
Israeli intelligence said the damage was 'very significant' but the Pentagon's early assessment found that 'the US set them back maybe a few months, tops'.
By analysing satellite images, decoding military assessments and cutting through the political posturing, The Telegraph examines what we know about just how badly damaged Iran's nuclear programme really is.
Damage sustained
Israel and America's attacks had two clear objectives: cripple Iran's ability to make weapons-grade uranium and stop them using their already enriched uranium to make a weapon.
The first target was the Natanz enrichment plant. Israel's initial strikes on Natanz disabled its main electrical substation, the main power lines, back-up generators and the fuel tanks which make them run.
Without a power supply, installed centrifuges – which spin at supersonic speeds to enrich uranium – would not work properly.
Given the electrical structures were above ground, we can be sure that the strikes were successful. Satellite images and video from the ground shows smoke rising from the structures.
'The assumption is that they (the centrifuges) were pretty seriously broken,' said Jeffrey Lewis, an expert at the James Martin Centre for Nonproliferation Studies.
Separately, three small explosive impact craters are visible on the surface above the enrichment halls, and suggest 'substantially more damage' than that first Israeli attack, according to analysis from the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS).
But 'because the damage is underground and unseen in satellite imagery, there were questions, even from Israeli officials, how effective the potentially up to three penetrators were', it noted.
The US then dropped at least two 'bunker buster' bombs on Natanz on June 22.
At least one penetration hole can be seen in satellite imagery, indicating a 'double-tap strike' to hit deeper underground, the institute said.
A blow to the crown jewels
The US military also dropped a dozen 30,000lb bombs on 'the crown jewels of Iran's nuclear programme', the Fordow enrichment plant, targeting two weak points in the mountain over the facility.
Analysis shows that the ventilation shafts and the centrifuge cascade hall were targeted, as shown by two sets of penetration holes overlaid onto a map of what is believed to lie up to 80 metres below the surface.
If everything happened according to plan, then the blast waves from the bombs would have run through the halls – and as they were perpendicular to one another, could have boosted the likelihood of maximum destruction, according to Mr Lewis.
On Thursday, US defence officials described this exact attack plan for Fordow. But they also noted that because the relevant damage was underground, there was no video evidence.
'No one is under there, able to assess,' said Pete Hegseth, the US defence secretary.
Activity before the attacks gives us some clues as to how bad the damage may be.
In advance of the US attacks, it appears Iran backfilled tunnels leading underground at Fordow and another site, Isfahan.
Doing so 'can serve multiple purposes, such as inhibiting attack from the surface, as well as containing any explosion or preventing the ejection of hazardous materials from the internal complex in the event of an attack', according to the ISIS report.
'If we had seen all the dirt packed in the entrances blown out, I would think they had crushed the tunnel,' Mr Lewis said.
'Imagine if something happens inside your house, and your windows blow out – you know what happened inside is bad news.'
Further evidence lies on the ground above the tunnels and halls. It is still intact. Had there been a major underground collapse, it is likely that subsidence would be visible in the satellite images.
But the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) Chair Rafael Grossi is more upbeat. He told Radio France Internationale the centrifuges at Fordow are 'no longer operational.'
In the interview, Mr Grossi said IAEA officials know the installations 'like the back of our hand' and can 'can deduce fairly precise conclusions by looking at satellite images.'
'Given the power of these devices and the technical characteristics of a centrifuge, we already know that these centrifuges are no longer operational, because they are fairly precise machines: there are rotors, and the vibrations [from the bombs] have completely destroyed them.'
The scientists
Attacks also destroyed facilities linked to nuclear development, including the headquarters of Iran's defence research agency, and buildings at a university in Tehran believed to be associated with the nuclear programme.
On top of all this, Israel's strikes assassinated 20 top military leaders and 14 nuclear scientists – people who would have directed and executed nuclear weapons development.
Practically, their roles have been filled by new commanders and experts. The regime remains defiant.
'Even assuming the complete destruction of the sites, the game is not over, because enriched materials, indigenous knowledge and political will remain intact,' said Ali Shamkhani, an adviser to Khamenei.
What's left?
There is little dispute that the bombs and missiles the Israelis and Americans used caused damage, but questions remain over whether any material survived the attacks, and if the intended targets underground – uranium stocks, enrichment technology – were still there to be destroyed when the attacks occurred.
Before the war started on June 13, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said it believed Iran had 408.6kg of uranium enriched to 60 per cent.
'The moment you start an operation, a lot of the intelligence you had of where things were will no longer be useful, because the Iranians will move them around,' said Farzan Sabet, a managing researcher at the Geneva Graduate Institute.
A convoy of trucks and bulldozers were spotted in the days prior to the US attack at both the Fordow and Isfahan nuclear sites, as seen in satellite images.
Experts immediately cautioned that Iran had moved materials off-site.
Iranian officials later claimed this was the case, saying the majority of its enriched uranium stockpile had been taken out of Fordow and to a secret location.
Iran's deputy foreign minister also said that the regime would not inform the IAEA about 'special measures' to protect its nuclear sites and materials.
Mr Hegseth, when asked about the possibility that materials had been moved, did not deny it outright.
Instead, he tiptoed around it by saying he wasn't 'aware of any intelligence that suggests things were not where they were supposed to be'.
JD Vance, the US vice-president, hinted that the material had been moved at the 11th hour on Sunday
'We're going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel,' he told ABC News.
But Mr Trump denied this position on his Truth Social on Thursday.
'The cars and small trucks at the site were those of concrete workers trying to cover up the top of the shafts. Nothing was taken out of facility. Would take too long, too dangerous, and very heavy and hard to move!'
Moving Iran's uranium stocks would have been challenging to do quickly but not impossible, especially amid wartime survival mentality, experts have said.
The perfect hiding place, as revealed by The Telegraph, could be Pickaxe mountain.
This facility, just minutes away from Natanz, has a size and depth that suggest facilities with a significant enrichment capacity. Its underground chambers are possibly 100 metres deep, which puts it even deeper than Fordow – and harder to strike.
Separately, only one day before Israel attacked, Iran said it had built another new nuclear enrichment facility. It has never been inspected, and its location has not been revealed.
And there may be more nuclear sites that the Iranians simply have not disclosed.
'My guess is they probably have at least one more beyond that,' Mr Lewis said.
Political posturing
For both the US and Israel, it is important to project the attacks as a win – to bolster the political standings of both Mr Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister.
Destroying Iran's nuclear programme was the main justification that Mr Netanyhau gave for directly attacking the country.
For Mr Trump, it's important to emerge triumphant as the decision to get directly embroiled in conflict in the Middle East has divided his supporters – given that he campaigned on getting America out of its 'forever wars'.
Publicly, too, Iran could leverage widespread belief that its programme has been delayed significantly, giving the regime some cover to accelerate development secretly, if its leadership decides to race towards building a nuclear weapon.
An initial assessment from the US defence intelligence agency also reportedly used signals intelligence – likely intercepted communications of Iranian officials.
Mr Trump referred to intercepts when he spoke with journalists on Thursday morning.
'Two Iranians went down to see it and they called back and they said, 'This place is gone',' he said.
But the leadership remains defiant. 'The Americans were unable to accomplish anything significant in the attack on nuclear sites,' Khamenei said on Thursday.
'It became clear that the American president needs to exaggerate – they exaggerate to cover up the truth.'
When will we know for sure?
The Pentagon intelligence leaked to CNN and The New York Times that has so enraged Mr Trump was a 'low confidence' preliminary assessment that said the attack had only set back Iran's ability to produce the bomb by a matter of months.
The CIA was more optimistic, with director John Ratcliffe saying there was 'credible intelligence' Iran's nuclear programme had been 'severely damaged'.
The full truth will take weeks or months – if ever – to emerge, after Iran conducts its own damage assessments and their information filters into communications channels.
'A professional battle damage assessment takes time,' an Israeli official told Axios.
'Israeli intelligence services haven't arrived at any bottom lines for now,' the official added.
'But we don't think there was any bug in the operation, and we have no indications the bunker buster bombs didn't work. Nobody here is disappointed.'
One way for foreign agencies to gauge underground damage is to use radar imagery to see if the mountains above the facilities shrunk in size, suggesting significant geological changes.
But possibly the most useful information will come from on-the-ground work, relying heavily on Israeli intelligence 'to be hunting in Iran, even under the ceasefire, for non-destroyed residuals such as nuclear materials, centrifuges, and nuclear weapon manufacturing capabilities', the ISIS report said.
Some clues could come from a deal struck between the US and Iran. The two countries will meet next week.
As part of an agreement, Mr Trump will demand that Tehran hands over all its enriched uranium, according to Israeli reports.
Only Iran knows how much of that 400kg stock is left, and where it is. It will be expected to provide answers or face further sanctions.
In any case, the impact of the attacks has become clear. Spencer Faragasso a senior research fellow from the resected ISIS said: 'Overall, it may possibly take years for Iran to reconstitute the capabilities it lost at these facilities.'
In the meantime, the evidence shows that they are determined to carry on with their programme.
This week, Iran's parliament unanimously agreed to suspend all cooperation with the IAEA – the main window through which the world could track the regime's nuclear ambitions.
'The Iranians might decide that the only way to prevent future military attacks on its territory is not only to reconstitute the programme, but to push toward weaponisation,' said Darya Dolzikova, a senior research fellow at the Royal United Services Institute, a UK think tank.
At least one Iranian MP, Ahmad Naderi, is unequivocal. 'I believe we need to conduct a nuclear bomb test. There is no other way for us.'