The United States, Israel, and Iran are presenting sharply different views on the recent airstrikes that targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities, highlighting deep-seated tensions and conflicting narratives in the region.
Diverging Accounts of the Damage
The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) announced on Wednesday that American airstrikes had caused significant damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. According to the CIA, key facilities were destroyed, setting back Iran’s nuclear program by years.
U.S. President Donald Trump, speaking at a NATO summit in The Hague, claimed that Iran’s nuclear capabilities had been pushed back by “decades.” He warned that the U.S. would “definitely” take further action if Iran attempted to restart its nuclear development. Trump also mentioned that negotiations for a new nuclear deal with Tehran would begin soon.
Israel echoed these sentiments. Eyal Zamir, Chief of the General Staff of the Israel Defense Forces, stated that after 12 days of military operations, their objectives had been achieved. He described the damage to Iran’s nuclear program as “systemic” and estimated that it had been set back by several years.
Iran’s Response
Iran acknowledged that the strikes caused serious damage. Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, confirmed that U.S. B-2 bombers inflicted “serious destruction” on nuclear sites. However, he condemned what he described as “inconsistent messages” from Washington.
Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi declared that the attacks had only strengthened Iran’s determination to maintain and expand its nuclear capabilities. “No one in Iran will give up nuclear technology,” he stated, emphasizing the nation’s resilience and commitment.
Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesperson for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, announced that preparations to rebuild the damaged facilities were already underway. “Our strategy is to ensure there is no interruption to production or services,” he said.
International Reactions
Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), questioned the U.S. assessment that Iran’s nuclear progress had been undone by decades, calling it a “political assessment.” While acknowledging the serious damage to the facilities, he noted that the recovery timeline would depend on Iran’s actions moving forward.
In a significant move, Iran’s parliament voted on Wednesday to suspend cooperation with the IAEA, a decision that awaits final approval by Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. Grossi reminded Iran of its legal obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty and warned against military strikes on nuclear infrastructure, which are prohibited under international law.
Expert Opinions
Analysts warn that the conflicting narratives and escalating tensions could have serious implications for regional stability. Li Zixin, an assistant research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies, expressed concern that Iran’s suspension of IAEA cooperation plunges its nuclear activities into a “state of opacity.”
“Preemptive military actions may backfire,” Li cautioned. “The knowledge and expertise cannot be bombed away.”
With the 2015 Iran nuclear deal set to expire in October and no new agreement in place, experts fear a significant breach in the nuclear non-proliferation regime. “Without compromise, the risk of escalation remains very real,” Li added.
Looking Ahead
The differing accounts from the United States, Israel, and Iran underscore the deep divisions that persist over Iran’s nuclear program. As negotiations loom and tensions simmer, the international community watches closely, hoping for a peaceful resolution to prevent further instability in the Middle East.
