Latest news with #NavyTomahawk
UPI
02-07-2025
- Politics
- UPI
Trump should be euphoric about last 2 weeks, but will success endure?
President Donald Trump delivers an address to the nation alongside Vice President JD Vance (L), Secretary of State Marco Rubio (C) and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth at the White House in Washington on June 21 after U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. Pool photo by Carlos Barria/UPI | License Photo July 2 (UPI) -- In political terms, President Donald Trump could declare last week as the equivalent of a World Series-winning grand slam home run or a last-second touchdown to clinch the Super Bowl. In foreign policy, according to Trump, 30y Navy Tomahawk cruise missiles and 14 blockbuster 30,000-pound bombs "obliterated" Iran's nuclear program and gained a cease-fire between the two belligerents -- Iran and Israel. And for the first time, Trump convinced 31 of 32 NATO members to increase overall defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product-- 3.5% for defense and 1.5% for building greater "resilience" in the event of conflict. Domestically, the stunning win for the New York City Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani and various Supreme Court decisions, one of which reduced the authority of district judges to issue nationwide injunctions, will be regarded as great political victories for the president. Whether the "hat trick" of three successes will occur before July Fourth with the passage of Trump's "beautiful big bill," will be determined soon. But any White House would be euphoric about the last two weeks unless or until a truly independent analysis determines the immediate and longer-term consequences of these events. America's Operation Midnight Hammer exploited the Israeli air and missile campaigns that neutralized Iran's defenses and greatly damaged its nuclear infrastructure. But without accurate bomb damage assessment that will take time to generate or boots on the ground to make a physical inspection of the extent of destruction, a rush to judgment such as the president made is likely to be premature. Questions about how much of Iran's highly enriched uranium survived, where it is stored and if Iran has enough centrifuges to continue enrichment need answers. Further, how long the cease-fire lasts and what the Iranian and Israeli exit strategies are remain far from clear. If Iran refuses to accept the existence of Israel with some form of recognition and agrees to forgo its nuclear weapons aspirations, either will be a deal breaker. And without any peace agreement by both parties, what would prevent Israel (or the United States) to reattack Iran in the future? At home, debate over the War Powers Act passed in 1973 to limit the president's authority to order the U.S. military into action will not resolve the inherent contradiction between Congress and its sole responsibility to declare war and the president's constitutional duty to serve as commander-in-chief. While virtually every issue in the United States has become politicized -- especially those with the greatest visibility -- to illustrate this cynicism, suppose Kamala Harris had been president and had ordered these strikes. How would Republicans have responded? A good guess is that the same criticisms and cries of anguish made by Democrats over Operation Midnight Hammer would be repeated by Republicans to deride the president. Indeed, it is unfortunate that what Harris might have done will not be raised. If it were, Democrats, like Republicans, would call this question too hypothetical to be answered. Worse, any objective evaluation of the impact of Operation Midnight Hammer almost certainly will be judged through a biased political lens as Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were in 2003. For NATO, even if an increase to 5% of GDP were achievable, what would this mean for the alliance? Currently, U.S. GDP is about $30 trillion. Five percent equates to $1.5 trillion, with about $1.05 trillion to defense and the remainder to resilience. The United States presently will spend just over $1 trillion for defense depending on what is in or out of the reconciliation bill, assuming it becomes law. Because of uncontrolled real annual cost growth of 5% to 7% (which is above the inflation rate) for all programs from people to precision weapons, this increase will not be sufficient to maintain the current U.S. force levels. The same math applies to all NATO members, and their politics suggest that the 5% goal will not be met. In domestic politics, Trump may indeed have benefitted. If Mamdani wins in New York City, Democratic politics will appear to have moved far more to the left. That trend cost Democrats the presidency in 2024. If it continues, that could hazard the 2026 midterm elections and potential control of Congress. And defining the extent of presidential powers will continue to be an unresolved and probably unresolvable quandary. So, is Trump in wonderland or wonderment? Has this week been a political grand slam? We will not know the answers right away. But we will know them sometime. That will truly be a real day of reckoning. Harlan Ullman is UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave Distinguished Columnist; senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book, co-written with Field Marshal The Lord David Richards, former U.K. chief of defense and due out next year, is Who Thinks Wins: Preventing Strategic Catastrophe. The writer can be reached on X @harlankullman.
UPI
25-06-2025
- Politics
- UPI
Israel, Iran and the last crusade for peace
Protesters march against U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran war in downtown Los Angeles earlier this month. After this past weekend's strike by U.S. Air Force B-2 bombers and Navy Tomahawk missiles on Iran's Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear facilities, a fragile cease-fire has been put into place between the two nations. Photo by Jim Ruymen/UPI | License Photo June 24 (UPI) -- Last weekend's strike by U.S. Air Force B-2 bombers and Navy Tomahawk missiles on Iran's Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear facilities has brokered a cease-fire between Iran and Israel. That this cease-fire is fragile is an extreme understatement. The reason is that the two most fundamental casus belli -- Iran's intent to destroy Israel and the future of its nuclear ambitions -- have not been addressed yet. No matter how one views the president, that there is even a patina of a lasting cease-fire present is a remarkable achievement even though its half life may be hours or days. And Donald Trump's brusque assessment that both Israel and Iran do "not know what the [expletive] they are doing" may be reversed. Both may know exactly what they are doing. The cease-fire gives both belligerents a chance to regroup, rearm and reconsider what comes next. For Iran, that leadership knows better than anyone how much or how little damage was done and whether or not the president's claims that its nuclear facilities have been obliterated are accurate. Preliminary satellite photographs show that a number of trucks arrived and left Fordow before the attacks. This suggests that fissile material and even some centrifuges may have been removed and are safely stored elsewhere. One important question is whether or not Iran or Israel is better off with and profits more from the cease-fire than the other. While Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu can claim victory should the cease-fire last, he is stuck with the war in Gaza. Regardless of the rationale for retaliating for the heinous October 7th Hamas attacks that killed over 1,200 Israelis, Netanyahu's campaign is destroying Gaza as a viable place to live. That will become an issue again. The Israeli public no longer needs to fear missile and drone attacks at least for as long as the cease-fire lasts. This is the first time probably since 1948 when the public was at such danger from attack. This is, at least, a relief. Iran can regroup and reconsider its options. It can reconstitute its military and its chain of command. It cannot rebuild its air defenses that were destroyed, certainly for the short-term. And it cannot replenish in sufficient numbers its stocks of long-range ballistic missiles and drones that were either fired against Israel or destroyed in the air or on the ground. Reports that Iran could seek a nuclear weapon from Russia or North Korea are pure rumor and exceedingly unlikely. So what's next? Can the Gordian knot-like problems of Iran recognizing Israel and abandoning its plea for annihilating that country and forgoing much or all of its nuclear industries, especially those for peaceful purposes, be resolved? If they cannot, then the life expectancy of the cease-fire is at great risk. And the wars in Gaza and Ukraine still are ongoing. President Trump can call for negotiations between Israel and Iran, sustaining the cease-fire while these take place. But time is critical. It is unclear how long both belligerents will restrain themselves while a broader peace agreement is negotiated. One possibility is that they will not and hostilities could resume if one side sees an advantage in breaking the cease-fire. Regardless of outcomes that will determine the consequences of the cease-fire, for the moment, this is an unprecedented moment. However, the euphoria of the seemingly success of the U.S. attack can be clouding objectivity. Enthusiasm may not be justified. And given Trump's need for adulation, all the credits and well-dones could exaggerate the realities that will follow. Last week's column speculated that should the Iran-Israeli conflict be resolved, what Trump has termed the "12-day war" could lead to a lasting peace. While I, along with others, have many doubts given the history and need for a nation that has not been invaded or occupied to make such a volte-face, at least the possibility -- however slim -- exists. That means, Mr. Trump, for you to achieve your aim of bringing a real peace in the Middle East, Iran must accept Israel's existence and forgo all threats about its destruction. Should Iran be allowed to maintain peaceful uses of nuclear energies, intimate surveillance is vital. And this must be credible to and believable by Israel. To say that the chances of this optimistic scenario taking place are unknown and unknowable is understatement on steroids. But make no mistake. Even if the probabilities are one in a thousand, should peace follow, it could be the last crusade. Harlan Ullman is UPI's Arnaud de Borchgrave Distinguished Columnist; senior adviser at Washington's Atlantic Council, chairman of a private company, and principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. His next book, co-written with Field Marshal The Lord David Richards, former U.K. chief of defense and due out next year, is Who Thinks Wins: Preventing Strategic Catastrophe. The writer can be reached on X @harlankullman.
New York Post
23-06-2025
- Politics
- New York Post
Ex-Clinton national security official admits Kamala Harris ‘would not have had the courage' to order ‘bold' Iran strike
A former National Security Council official from the Bill Clinton administration claimed over the weekend that former Vice President Kamala Harris would not have had the 'courage or fortitude' to strike Iran's nuclear program if she were commander in chief. 'I'm not a blind tribalist and am perfectly comfortable praising President Trump for bold and courageous actions in support of America's core national interests, as he took last night,' Jamie Metzl, a vocal critic of Trump and a self-described Harris voter, wrote on X. 'Although I believe electing Kamala Harris would have been better for our democracy [and] society,' he went on. 'I also believe VP Harris would not have had the courage or fortitude to take such an essential step as the president took last night.' Advertisement On Saturday, the US attacked Iran's Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites with B-2 stealth bombers and Navy Tomahawk missiles in a dramatic attempt to ensure the theocratic regime does not obtain an atomic weapon. 3 President Trump has taken heat from elements of the MAGA base over the attacks. The White House/ X Advertisement 3 Jamie Metzl praised President Trump for ordering the strikes on Iran. Getty Images An official damage assessment hasn't been made public, though Trump has already claimed that 'monumental damage' was done to those facilities. Metzl, who also served as former President Joe Biden's deputy staff director on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, further warned about the dangers of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. 'Iran has been at war with the United States for 46 years. Its regime has murdered thousands of American citizens,' he stressed. 'Its slogan, 'death to America' was not window dressing but core ideology.' Advertisement 'It was racing toward a nuclear weapon with every intention of using it to threaten America, our allies, and the Middle East region as a whole. No actions like this come without risks, and I imagine the story will get more complicated over time, but that's why these types of decisions are complicated. In addition to his roles in the Clinton administration and in the Senate, Metzl also served as a United Nations human rights officer and is currently a member of the World Health Organization advisory committee. Since launching his first presidential campaign in 2016, Trump has long maintained that the US can not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. 3 Kamala Harris previously said she would keep all options on the table to respond to Iran if it got too close to obtaining a nuke. Connor Terry/ZUMA / Advertisement During the 2024 campaign, Harris described Iran as America's 'greatest adversary' and said that all options were on the table to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuke. Trump greenlit the bombing campaign on Iran just over a week after Israel launched a series of preemptive strikes on the regime to degrade its military capabilities and nuclear program. Many military experts said that the US was needed to take out the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, which is cut deep into a mountain. The Air Force dropped 14 30,000-pound GBU-57 A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOP) — known as 'bunker-buster bombs' — during Saturday's attack.
Boston Globe
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Officials concede they don't know the fate of Iran's uranium stockpile
The Iranians have made it clear they are not interested in having conversations with the United States, accusing Washington of deceiving officials in the Iranian capital, Tehran, during the last set of negotiations while planning the air attack. Moreover, that stockpile of fuel is now one of the few nuclear bargaining chips in Iranian hands. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up In a briefing for reporters Sunday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the new chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Dan Caine, avoided Trump's maximalist claims of success. They said an initial battle-damage assessment of all three sites struck by Air Force B-2 bombers and Navy Tomahawk missiles showed 'severe damage and destruction.' Satellite photographs of the primary target, the Fordo uranium enrichment plant that Iran built under a mountain, showed several holes where a dozen 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrators -- one of the largest conventional bombs in the U.S. arsenal -- punched deep holes in the rock. The Israeli military's initial analysis concluded that the site, the target of American and Israeli military planners for more than 26 years, sustained serious damage from the strike but had not been destroyed. Advertisement But there was also evidence, according to two Israeli officials with knowledge of the intelligence, that Iran had moved equipment and uranium from the site in recent days. And there was growing evidence that the Iranians, attuned to Trump's repeated threats to take military action, had removed 400 kilograms, or roughly 880 pounds, of uranium enriched to 60% purity. The level usually used in nuclear weapons is 90%. The 60% enriched fuel had been stored deep inside another nuclear complex, near the ancient capital of Isfahan. Rafael Mariano Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said by text that the fuel had last been seen by his teams of United Nations inspectors about a week before Israel began its attacks on Iran. In an interview Sunday on CNN, he said 'Iran has made no secret that they have protected this material.' Asked by text later in the day whether he meant that the fuel stockpile -- which is stored in special casks small enough to fit in the trunks of about 10 cars -- had been moved, he replied, 'I do.' That appeared to be the mystery about the fuel's fate that Vance was discussing. If so, Isfahan would not be the only place where the custodians of the Iranian nuclear program -- a subject of nationalistic pride and the symbol of Iran's ability to defend itself -- were trying to move equipment and material out of sight, as they also tried to harden the Fordo plant to protect what had to stay in place. Advertisement Satellite images released by Maxar Technologies at the tunnels leading into the Fordo mountain, taken in the days before the American strike, show 16 cargo trucks positioned near an entrance. An analysis by the Open Source Centre in London suggested that Iran may have been preparing the site for a strike. It is unclear what, if anything, was removed from the facility. In fact, there was only so much the Iranians could save. The giant centrifuges that spin at supersonic speeds, purifying uranium, are piped together and bolted to the cement floor. One U.S. official said it would have been unrealistic to completely move equipment out of Fordo after the conflict with Israel began. The official added that historical documents about the nuclear program were buried in the bowels of the site, likely complicating any efforts in reconstituting it. In coming days, both the Iranians and intelligence agencies expect to learn more about the Natanz enrichment site, which is older, larger and less well protected than Fordo. It was struck by the Israelis repeatedly, and they destroyed an aboveground enrichment center and disrupted the electrical system. Grossi later said he believed the interruption of the electrical supply could have sent the centrifuges spinning out of control, probably destroying all of them. How long it would take the Iranians to repair and replace that equipment is unknown; it would probably stretch for years. But Iran is also building a new, deep replacement for Natanz in the south of the city. Officials in Tehran have told the IAEA that they have not yet opened the plant, so there is nothing to see. Advertisement If Iran is truly pursuing a nuclear weapon -- which it officially denies -- it is taking more time than any nuclear-armed nation in history. The United States developed the Manhattan Project in four years or so, developing the bombs dropped at Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end the war in the Pacific. The Soviet Union conducted its first test in 1949, only four years later. India, Pakistan and Israel all sped the process. The Iranians have been at it for more than 20 years, and an archive of data stolen from a Tehran warehouse by Israel a number of years ago showed that Iranian engineers were exploring nuclear triggers and other equipment that would only be used to detonate a weapon. That was around 2003, when, according to American intelligence, the engineers received instructions to halt work on weaponization. Comments by Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in recent days suggest they believe that work has resumed, though no evidence to support the contention has been made public. If so, the strikes on Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan may only reinforce the view among Iranian leaders that they need a weapon for survival of the government. History also suggests that diplomacy has usually been more effective than sabotage or military attacks in providing assurances that a country does not pursue atomic weapons. More than 15 years ago, the joint U.S.-Israeli attack on Natanz, using a sophisticated cyber weapon, caused about one-fifth of the country's 5,000 or so centrifuges to blow up. Advertisement But the Iranians not only rebuilt, they installed more sophisticated equipment. Before Israel's attack this month, they had roughly 19,000 centrifuges in operation. It was only when the Obama administration struck the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran that the United States got a fuller picture of its capabilities, thanks to the work of inspectors. And those inspections were choked off -- and many security cameras disabled -- after Trump declared the nuclear accord a 'disaster' and withdrew from it. Tehran's reaction was to scale up centrifuge production, enrich uranium at levels only weapons states need, and stonewall the IAEA. Now, it is unclear whether the team of IAEA inspectors who were in the country when the conflict with Israel broke out will be permitted by the Iranian government to resume their inspections, which would include verifying the whereabouts and the safety of that near-bomb-grade uranium. All international inspections have been suspended during wartime, Iranian officials have said. And even if they were to resume, it was unclear if the inspectors could physically gain access to the bombed Fordo underground plant, or the wreckage of the larger enrichment facility at Natanz. Mick Mulroy, a former Pentagon official in the first Trump administration and a former CIA officer, said of the strike: 'With the type and amount of munitions used, it will likely set back the Iranian nuclear weapon program two to five years.' This article originally appeared in
Mint
23-06-2025
- Politics
- Mint
Did Iran outsmart United States? American officials claim Iran might have moved 400 kg of uranium before the strikes
A day after US President Donald Trump claimed that Iran's nuclear programme was 'completely and totally obliterated' by airstrikes, senior officials admitted they didn't know where Iran's near-weapons-grade uranium was currently located. At a press briefing on Sunday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Dan Caine avoided President Trump's bold claims that they completely destroyed the nuclear sites. They said early reports showed 'severe damage and destruction' at the three sites hit by Air Force B-2 bombers and Navy Tomahawk missiles. Satellite images of the main target — Iran's Fordo uranium enrichment plant — showed multiple deep holes caused by a dozen 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs dropped by the United States. Early reports by Israeli militaryshow the site was badly damaged but not completely destroyed. However, two Israeli officials said, as reported by NYT, that there is also enough evidence to show Iran had moved equipment and uranium from the site in recent days. Moreover, due to Trump's recents threats they had removed 400 kilograms, or roughly 880 pounds, of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity. That is just below the 90 percent that is usually used in nuclear weapons. Rafael Mariano Grossi, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, had informed the UN inspectors that his team last saw the fuel about a week before Israel started its attacks on Iran.. But he said on CNN that 'Iran has made no secret that they have protected this material.' On questioning whether he meant that the fuel stockpile — which is stored in containers small enough to fit in about 10 car trunks — had been moved, he replied, 'I do.' Meanwhile, Vice President JD Vance told ABC News, 'We are going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel and that's one of the things that we're going to have conversations with the Iranians about.' However, he noted that Iran's ability to build a nuclear weapon had been seriously weakened because it no longer had the machines needed to turn the uranium into working bombs.
