logo
Satellite Images Show Iran's Buried Nuclear Sites That Trump Could Strike

Satellite Images Show Iran's Buried Nuclear Sites That Trump Could Strike

Newsweek19-06-2025
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
In its mission to take out Tehran's nuclear program, two of Iran's major sites are likely out of reach of Israeli weapons.
Israel launched what it termed a "preemptive" campaign against Iran's nuclear facilities and scientists, as well as the country's ballistic missile sites and other military assets, on Friday.
Iran responded with drone and ballistic missile barrages. Strikes launched by both countries continued into Thursday.
Fordow, a major facility roughly 100 miles from the capital, Tehran, is built deep under a mountain. It is widely acknowledged the only real option to take out the site are 30,000-pound bunker-busting American bombs launched from U.S. B-2 Spirit bombers.
However, there is another hub, known as Mt. Kolang Gaz La, which sits on the outskirts of the Natanz nuclear site, considered Tehran's main facility for enriching uranium southeast of the capital.
The Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) published satellite imagery back in April that it said showed Iran was building a new security perimeter around the base of Mt. Kolang Gaz La.
Satellite imagery and annotations published by the Institute for Science and International Security in April 2025.
Satellite imagery and annotations published by the Institute for Science and International Security in April 2025.
Institute for Science and International Security
The United Nations' nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has not visited the site of two nuclear tunnels at Mt. Kolang Gaz La, the organization has said.
"The new complex features halls more deeply buried than the Fordow uranium enrichment site," ISIS said in its April assessment.
Israel cannot collapse the Fordow, nor Mt. Kolang Gaz La sites, William Alberque told Newsweek.
Alberque is a visiting fellow at the Henry L. Stimson Center think tank and a former director of NATO's Arms Control, Disarmament and WMD [Weapons of Mass Destruction] Nonproliferation Center.
Iran said in 2020 it had started construction on a new hall in "the heart of the mountain near Natanz," in the center of the country, to make advanced centrifuges.
Israel and the U.S. have both insisted it is unacceptable for Iran to gain a nuclear weapon. While Tehran has said its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, officials have publicly discussed the possibility of weapons.
U.S. President Donald Trump has kept the world on tenterhooks by refusing to confirm whether American aircraft and munitions would launch offensive action on Iranian sites. The Republican president insists Iran wants to "make a deal," but has privately approved attack plans, according to reports on Thursday, although no final decision has been rubber-stamped.
The Israeli military said on Thursday it had struck an "inactive" nuclear reactor in Arak, east of Fordow, and a "nuclear weapons development site near Natanz."
"This nuclear reactor in Arak was created for one purpose: to build a nuclear bomb," the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said. Iranian state media confirmed an Israeli strike on the reactor and reported an attack on the Khondab heavy water facility.
Satellite imagery and annotations published by the Institute for Science and International Security in April 2025, showing the Natanz nuclear enrichment site and construction to the south of the main complex.
Satellite imagery and annotations published by the Institute for Science and International Security in April 2025, showing the Natanz nuclear enrichment site and construction to the south of the main complex.
Institute for Science and International Security
The IAEA said it had information indicating the half-built Khondab heavy water research reactor was hit, but said it was not operational and had no radiological impact.
"With Iran, the facilities that we are most concerned about are the operating power plants, with Bushehr at the top of the list," Nickolas Roth, from the Nuclear Threat Initiative, told the Washington Post.
Israel targeted Natanz in its initial strikes last week. Satellite imagery captured by Maxar, a space technology firm, on Saturday showed multiple damaged buildings at the site, while the IAEA said on Friday the aboveground part of the facility had been "destroyed," along with power infrastructure there.
The watchdog then assessed on Monday that Israel had "severely damaged if not destroyed" centrifuges at the underground facility in Natanz.
The belowground centrifuges were not hit directly, but strikes caused power cuts and "completely destroyed" the aboveground Natanz site, Rafael Grossi, chief of the IAEA, told the BBC.
Mohammad Eslami, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, described the country's facilities on Wednesday as in "good" condition, according to the semiofficial Tasnim news agency.
The agency told the U.N. Security Council at the time that Iranian authorities had reported attacks on Isfahan and to Fordow, but could not provide further details.
But satellite imagery has indicated no visible damage to Fordow, a site publicly revealed in 2009.
Israel struck nuclear-linked sites in Isfahan, south of Fordow, and damaged four buildings at the facility, Grossi said on Sunday.
Trump has warned Iran—which has cast the U.S. as already involved—that it would face "the full strength and might" of the U.S. military on "levels you've never seen before" if Iran attacked the U.S. in any way.
The country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, threatened the U.S. on Wednesday with "irreparable damage" if Washington became militarily involved.
"I may do it, I may not," Trump told reporters at the White House on Wednesday, when asked if he would launch attacks.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Letters: What began as a war against Hamas has turned into the starvation of an entire people
Letters: What began as a war against Hamas has turned into the starvation of an entire people

Chicago Tribune

time18 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

Letters: What began as a war against Hamas has turned into the starvation of an entire people

How many more images of starving children must we see before we, as a nation and as people of conscience, speak with moral clarity about what is happening in Gaza? What began as a campaign against Hamas has become something far more harrowing. We are witnessing the deliberate starvation of civilians, the destruction of homes, the suffocation of hope. The Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has crossed a line — from war to widespread humanitarian atrocity. This is not just a military operation. It is a policy of deprivation, displacement and collective punishment. Food and water are cut off. Aid is obstructed. Families are left to scavenge while their children wither from hunger. This is a stain on our shared humanity. Dare we acknowledge the echoes of history? We say 'never again' with solemnity, but here we are — watching the deliberate denial of food and medical care to a trapped population. The difference is that this time, the suffering is being inflicted by a state that should know too well the horrors of systemic dehumanization. And still, many hesitate to speak out. Let us be clear. Condemning the Netanyahu government's policies is not antisemitic — it is moral. It is necessary. Silence in the face of starvation, particularly of children, is complicity. We must find the courage to separate political fear from human truth. This is not about geopolitical alliances or partisanship. This is about children. About families. About the simple, undeniable truth that no government has the right to bomb civilians into submission or starve them into silence. History is watching. Our moral integrity is being tested. Will we fail this test?I've read many articles about the horrendous conditions in Gaza. War is always a tragedy for all involved, particularly when one side has clearly lost but continues to fight — causing more destruction and loss of life than necessary. In looking at history, Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee surrendered long after it had become clear that the Confederacy had lost the war. Likewise, Adolf Hitler's Germany surrendered to the Allied forces only after the destruction of Berlin, despite the successful invasion on D-Day and defensive offensive actions of the Russian army. If the Confederacy and Germany, both of which like Hamas started the wars at issue, had surrendered sooner, much less loss of life would have occurred, not to mention destruction of cities. Think of the loss and suffering that would have been avoided if Japan, which was given opportunities to surrender prior to U.S. nuclear bombs being dropped, had done so. War is complicated, and each side has positions that are entrenched in nationalism and sadly strong emotions such as greed, hate and racism. Still, history shows that eventually it becomes clear to one side the cause is lost. It is time for Hamas to stop the suffering of the Palestinian people it claims to lead and protect. Hamas has lost the war. Thus, it is not, given the rules and construct of war, for Hamas to attempt to govern the terms of surrender. If Hamas would release the Israeli hostages and withdraw its forces from Gaza, what does it think Israel would do? Certainly, with all eyes on Israel at that point, Israel would be compelled to immediately provide aid, engage in reconstruction of Gaza and treat the Palestinian people with dignity. However, according to Israel's terms, this can only be accomplished once the threat of Hamas is eliminated from Gaza. Hamas must recognize it has lost, surrender and end the unimaginable suffering of its anyone know what the term 'unconditional surrender' means? It means that war is ugly. If Hamas wants to stop children from starving, it needs to surrender unconditionally. Ask Nazi Germany. Ask Japan. Our expert news reporters never ever mention this fact.I am one of the Jewish people painfully sad about the starvation and armed killing inflicted upon innocent Palestinians and their children by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his ultra-right coalition and his firepower orders to Israeli military forces. The increased antisemitism in this country is, in effect, mostly anti-Netanyahu-ism. His original response to the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas massacre of Israelis and others certainly was expected — a death penalty for the Palestinian terrorists who make even their own people suffer. But he has carried on the Gaza assault for so long and indiscriminately that it has stricken an unthreatening population to the extent that it is considered a genocide by Israeli human rights groups. There are several other unfortunate factors in this ungodly situation. First of all, there is really no chance to totally kill off a hate-filled faction such as Hamas. Also, Netanyahu and his formidable intelligence team were unprepared for the Oct. 7 horror, although the danger always was warned. And it took hours before Netanyahu had his forces respond. Before this happened, a majority of Israelis would have voted an unpopular Netanyahu out of office over the corruption charges against him. The war with Hamas changed all that. For many years, Netanyahu has refused to accept a two-state solution. So he is at the root of this problem; the current part of it devastating beyond strength in numbers, and Arab states have taken a positive step to stop the carnage in Gaza Everyone wants the war in Gaza to end, especially Israel. Many wonder why the media and the noisy protesters at American universities seem to understand how to bring the war to a conclusion. I've yet to read or hear of anyone talking about Hamas laying down its weapons. If its fighters lay down their weapons, the war is over. Moral responsibility for protecting children from starvation is in the hands of Hamas, which started this front-page headline in the July 29 Tribune trumpets: 'Trump pushing Israel on Gaza aid.' Really? President Donald Trump has supposedly been 'pressuring' Israel for a long time, with no results. Trump generally doesn't hesitate to threaten other countries, as demonstrated by his tariff war. If he was actually pushing Israel, he could simply threaten to terminate our aid, as he did so publicly with Ukraine. But he won't because he and Israel likely are on the same page. It's called plausible David L. Applegate's letter to the editor ('Higher ed's liberal bias,' Aug. 1): Applegate defends Donald Trump's withholding of federal funds to force universities to abandon a perceived left-leaning bias. What Applegate's argument fails to note is that the initial attacks on the universities were based on an 'emergency' of antisemitism as declared by the president. After such declaration, draconian measures have been threatened and executed. In the past, standard procedures were used to handle allegations of antisemitism, such as letting the institution know; asking them to address the claims, if found to be legitimate; and giving the university time to address the incident. If these avenues were not taken to the liking of the government, additional steps might be taken. Trump deemed himself investigator, judge and jury, jumping almost immediately to 'atomic bomb' measures. Even worse, though, is piggybacking the unreasonable demands about who universities can hire to teach, what they can teach and who they can teach. This has nothing to do with antisemitism. It is just a ruse to force age-old, right-wing ideals on universities they don't like. If you want your kids to learn in a right-wing environment, send them to schools that embrace that ideology. Simple as that. Trump's tactics are winding through the courts. Hopefully some or all of it will be deemed unlawful. One can hope.

Russia says it no longer will abide by its self-imposed moratorium on intermediate-range missiles
Russia says it no longer will abide by its self-imposed moratorium on intermediate-range missiles

The Hill

time18 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Russia says it no longer will abide by its self-imposed moratorium on intermediate-range missiles

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia has declared that it no longer considers itself bound by a self-imposed moratorium on the deployment of nuclear-capable intermediate range missiles, a warning that potentially sets the stage for a new arms race as tensions between Moscow and Washington rise again over Ukraine. In a statement Monday, the Russian Foreign Ministry linked the decision to efforts by the U.S. and its allies to develop intermediate range weapons and preparations for their deployment in Europe and other parts of the world. It specifically cited U.S. plans to deploy Typhoon and Dark Eagle missiles in Germany starting next year. The ministry noted that such actions by the U.S. and its allies create 'destabilizing missile potentials' near Russia, creating a 'direct threat to the security of our country' and carry 'significant harmful consequences for regional and global stability, including a dangerous escalation of tensions between nuclear powers.' It didn't say what specific moves the Kremlin might take, but President Vladimir Putin has previously announced that Moscow was planning to deploy its new Oreshnik missiles on the territory of its neighbor and ally Belarus later this year. 'Decisions on specific parameters of response measures will be made by the leadership of the Russian Federation based on an interdepartmental analysis of the scale of deployment of American and other Western land-based intermediate-range missiles, as well as the development of the overall situation in the area of international security and strategic stability,' the Foreign Ministry said. The Russian statement follows President Donald Trump's announcement Friday that he's ordering the repositioning of two U.S. nuclear submarines 'based on the highly provocative statements' of Dmitry Medvedev, who was president in 2008-12 to allow Putin, bound by term limits, to later return to the office. Trump's statement came as his deadline for the Kremlin to reach a peace deal in Ukraine approaches later this week. Trump said he was alarmed by Medvedev's attitude. Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council chaired by Putin, has apparently sought to curry favor with his mentor by making provocative statements and frequently lobbing nuclear threats. Last week. he responded to Trump's deadline for Russia to accept a peace deal in Ukraine or face sanctions by warning him against 'playing the ultimatum game with Russia' and declaring that 'each new ultimatum is a threat and a step toward war.' Medvedev also commented on the Foreign Ministry's statement, describing Moscow's withdrawal from the moratorium as 'the result of NATO countries' anti-Russian policy.' 'This is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with,' he wrote on X. 'Expect further steps.' Intermediate-range missiles can fly between 500 to 5,500 kilometers (310 to 3,400 miles). Such land-based weapons were banned under the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Washington and Moscow abandoned the pact in 2019, accusing each other of violations, but Moscow declared its self-imposed moratorium on their deployment until the U.S. makes such a move. The collapse of the INF Treaty has stoked fears of a replay of a Cold War-era European missile crisis, when the U.S. and the Soviet Union both deployed intermediate-range missiles on the continent in the 1980s. Such weapons are seen as particularly destabilizing because they take less time to reach targets, compared with intercontinental ballistic missiles, leaving no time for decision-makers and raising the likelihood of a global nuclear conflict over a false launch warning. Russia's missile forces chief has declared that the new Oreshnik intermediate range missile, which Russia first used against Ukraine in November, has a range to reach all of Europe. Oreshnik can carry conventional or nuclear warheads. Putin has praised the Oreshnik's capabilities, saying its multiple warheads that plunge to a target at speeds up to Mach 10 are immune to being intercepted and are so powerful that the use of several of them in one conventional strike could be as devastating as a nuclear attack. Putin has warned the West that Moscow could use it against Ukraine's NATO allies who allowed Kyiv to use their longer-range missiles to strike inside Russia. ___ The Associated Press receives support for nuclear security coverage from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and Outrider Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Russia says it no longer will abide by its self-imposed moratorium on intermediate-range missiles
Russia says it no longer will abide by its self-imposed moratorium on intermediate-range missiles

Boston Globe

time18 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Russia says it no longer will abide by its self-imposed moratorium on intermediate-range missiles

Advertisement It didn't say what specific moves the Kremlin might take, but President Vladimir Putin has previously announced that Moscow was planning to deploy its new Oreshnik missiles on the territory of its neighbor and ally Belarus later this year. 'Decisions on specific parameters of response measures will be made by the leadership of the Russian Federation based on an interdepartmental analysis of the scale of deployment of American and other Western land-based intermediate-range missiles, as well as the development of the overall situation in the area of international security and strategic stability,' the Foreign Ministry said. The Russian statement follows President Trump's announcement Friday that he's ordering the repositioning of two US nuclear submarines 'based on the highly provocative statements' of Dmitry Medvedev, who was president in 2008-12 to allow Putin, bound by term limits, to later return to the office. Trump's statement came as his deadline for the Kremlin to reach a peace deal in Ukraine approaches later this week. Advertisement Trump said he was alarmed by Medvedev's attitude. Medvedev, who serves as deputy chairman of Russia's Security Council chaired by Putin, has apparently sought to curry favor with his mentor by making provocative statements and frequently lobbing nuclear threats. Last week. he responded to Trump's deadline for Russia to accept a peace deal in Ukraine or face sanctions by warning him against 'playing the ultimatum game with Russia' and declaring that 'each new ultimatum is a threat and a step toward war.' Medvedev also commented on the Foreign Ministry's statement, describing Moscow's withdrawal from the moratorium as 'the result of NATO countries' anti-Russian policy.' 'This is a new reality all our opponents will have to reckon with,' he wrote on X. 'Expect further steps.' Intermediate-range missiles can fly between 310 to 3,400 miles. Such land-based weapons were banned under the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. Washington and Moscow abandoned the pact in 2019, accusing each other of violations, but Moscow declared its self-imposed moratorium on their deployment until the US makes such a move. The collapse of the INF Treaty has stoked fears of a replay of a Cold War-era European missile crisis, when the US and the Soviet Union both deployed intermediate-range missiles on the continent in the 1980s. Such weapons are seen as particularly destabilizing because they take less time to reach targets, compared with intercontinental ballistic missiles, leaving no time for decision-makers and raising the likelihood of a global nuclear conflict over a false launch warning. Advertisement Russia's missile forces chief has declared that the new Oreshnik intermediate range missile, which Russia first used against Ukraine in November, has a range to reach all of Europe. Oreshnik can carry conventional or nuclear warheads. Putin has praised the Oreshnik's capabilities, saying its multiple warheads that plunge to a target at speeds up to Mach 10 are immune to being intercepted and are so powerful that the use of several of them in one conventional strike could be as devastating as a nuclear attack. Putin has warned the West that Moscow could use it against Ukraine's NATO allies who allowed Kyiv to use their longer-range missiles to strike inside Russia.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store