According to a classified military intelligence report obtained by CNN and the New York Times (NYT), US attacks on Iran’s three major uranium enrichment facilities did not eliminate the main components of Tehran’s nuclear program but only set it back by several months.

American officials who reviewed the report stated that the document, which includes a preliminary assessment of the 12-day war between Israel and Iran and the subsequent American attack, contradicts President Donald Trump’s declaration that the program was “completely destroyed.”

The report, prepared by the Pentagon, emphasized that the damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities was largely limited to the destruction of above-ground structures. It was determined that while the entrances to two underground facilities were filled with debris, the bunkers themselves remained intact.

Furthermore, it was reported that enriched uranium stockpiles might have been moved from the facilities before the attacks and that the centrifuges were “largely undamaged.” The report also noted that the US managed to damage the power grid of the nuclear facility built into a mountain at Fordo, but the facility itself did not sustain serious damage.

Timeline for a nuclear bomb extended

Before the military operation, US intelligence agencies estimated it would take Tehran at least three months to hastily produce a low-yield, primitive nuclear weapon. According to the NYT, military intelligence now predicts this timeline will extend to about six months.

The Times of Israel reported that Israeli intelligence also believes the US and Israeli attacks did not completely destroy Iran’s nuclear program, only setting it back “several years.”

Professor Jeffrey Lewis, an arms expert from the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, concurred with the US military intelligence assessment. According to Lewis, Iran could quickly rebuild its nuclear program using uranium stockpiles in the intact underground bunkers. The expert suggested that, in this scenario, it could take Iran five months to produce a nuclear bomb.

White House reacts strongly to leak

President Donald Trump had previously announced that the American attacks had resulted in the complete destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

White House Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt, however, described the intelligence assessment cited by CNN and the NYT as “false.” Leavitt stated the document was classified and had been leaked to the press by a “low-ranking, unidentified loser.”

In a statement on the social media platform X, Leavitt remarked, “The leak of this so-called assessment is a blatant attempt to humiliate President Trump and discredit the brave fighter pilots who carried out a flawless mission to destroy Iran’s nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when fourteen 30,000-pound bombs are precisely dropped on their targets: Total destruction.”

Trump also accused CNN and the NYT of collaborating to downplay one of the most successful military attacks in history. On his social media platform, Truth Social, Trump wrote, “The nuclear facilities in Iran have been completely destroyed!”

According to the NYT, the publication of the intelligence findings overshadowed President Trump’s victory at the NATO summit. The fact that the report was prepared by the Pentagon, which personally carried out the attacks, further underscored the situation’s significance.

While the Middle East is going through one of its most tense periods, the world has been shocked by the news of a direct attack by the United States on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Washington has announced that Iran’s nuclear facilities no longer exist. At the same time, Tehran has warned in a strong tone that it will respond to this aggression.

This action was immediately met with widespread regional and international reactions. The United Nations, the European Union, global powers such as Russia and China, and America’s traditional allies in the West each took their own stance.

At an emergency meeting of the United Nations, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres described the move as a dangerous turn in an already crisis-ridden region. A wave of criticism has also emerged within the United States, with some describing the attack as successful.

At the same time, a number of lawmakers from both the Republican and Democratic parties consider Trump’s action to be without congressional authorization and unconstitutional.

Some reactions:

Russian envoy: US attack carried out without any provocation from Iran.

US Representative: The Iranian regime should not have nuclear weapons.

Iran’s ambassador to the Security Council: America once again sacrificed its security for Benjamin Netanyahu.

Israeli Ambassador to the Security Council: America changed the course of history by attacking Iran.

Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency: Military attacks should not be carried out on nuclear facilities, saying he is ready to immediately travel to all countries regarding this case.

UK UN envoy: Military action alone cannot address concerns about Iran’s nuclear program, saying his country was not involved in Iran attack, referred to concerns about Iran’s nuclear program and said that military action alone cannot permanently address concerns about Iran’s nuclear program. He called on Iran to exercise restraint and urged the parties involved to return to the negotiating table.

France: Now is the time to end the attacks and return to negotiations.

But now why US cries to China for help to reopen Strait of Hormuz

Soon after a US airstrike in three locations, Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important shipping routes. Now this move puts the US in trouble and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has called on China to prevent Iran from closing the Strait of Hormuz.

However, it seems that the US is too late and according to Iran’s state-run Press TV, the decision was made by Iran’s Supreme National Security Council.

The US understands that any disruption on the supply of oil would have profound consequences for the economy and wants to play an emotional card with China to convince Iran to reopen the route as Beijing is also one of the largest buyers of Iranian oil.

It is reported that 20 percent of the world’s oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, and major oil and gas producing countries in the Middle East use this route to export energy.

Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump has said that regime change is inevitable if the Islamic Republic cannot “make Iran great again.” His statement came following US military strikes on Iranian military facilities.

Iran: Game is not over even assuming the complete destruction of the nuclear sites

Ali Shamkhani, advisor to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the religious leader of Iran, has said in response to the US attacks that even assuming the complete destruction of the nuclear sites, the “game is not over”.

“Even assuming the complete destruction of the sites, the game is not over; because the enriched materials, indigenous knowledge, and political will remain intact,” he said.

He noted that “now the political and operational initiative with the right to self-defense is in the hands of the side that knows how to play smart and avoids blind shooting.”

Oil prices climbed to their highest levels since President Donald Trump took office on Sunday evening, as energy markets braced for a potential US military strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities and Tehran’s subsequent retaliation.

US crude oil futures surged over 6% to $78 per barrel, more than $1 above the price on January 20, when Trump was inaugurated. This increase is expected to impact gasoline prices just as American drivers prepare to hit the road for the upcoming Fourth of July holiday.

Trump campaigned on a promise to lower consumer energy prices as part of his “energy dominance” agenda. However, the average pump price for regular gasoline is now approximately $3.22 per gallon, about 10 cents higher than when he took office, and it is likely to rise further this week.

The extent of future oil price increases will depend on Tehran’s reaction to any attacks. The Iranian parliament has already voted to close the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint through which a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil passes. The decision now awaits the approval of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Even if approved, the impact on the oil market will hinge on whether Iran and its allies merely harass oil tankers passing through the strait or launch a full-scale operation to block traffic entirely.

Reports that the White House gave Iran advance notice of the bombings and assured them there would be no further attacks suggest the Trump administration is trying to avoid a full-scale war, which could help keep oil prices in check.

Energy analysts have warned that a disruption to maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz could push oil prices above $100 per barrel.

Scott Modell, CEO of the energy and geopolitical analysis firm Rapidan Energy Group, commented, “This choreography suggests that both sides want to contain this crisis, not lose control of it. We think Iran’s response will be staged: harassment of commercial vessels, symbolic seizures of tankers, and limited rocket attacks on US military outposts. But we do not foresee a full-scale campaign to completely cut off energy flows in the Strait of Hormuz.”

Some market analysts believe that even if the conflict escalates, the US, OPEC countries like Saudi Arabia, and other suppliers have enough product to meet demand.

However, others caution that the price surge may have just begun. In a note, BCA Research analyst Roukaya Ibrahim stated, “It is true that these oil market dynamics show investors are adding a higher risk premium, factoring in the increased likelihood of an oil supply shock. But the more important question is whether this pricing adequately reflects the level of risk. Our impression is that the pressure on crude oil prices will remain upward in the near term.”