A newly declassified United States intelligence report has contradicted earlier claims by President Donald Trump that recent US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites had destroyed Tehran’s atomic programme, revealing instead that the facilities suffered minimal lasting damage.

According to a confidential assessment by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) obtained by multiple American media outlets, the strikes only delayed Iran’s nuclear development by a few months far from the “decades” setback touted by the US president.

The five-page DIA document focuses on the US-led airstrikes conducted on June 22, targeting Iran’s underground nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Despite the use of heavy bunker-buster bombs and coordinated cruise missile strikes, the report states that the actual damage was mostly restricted to aboveground structures, with Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium and its centrifuge halls largely unaffected.

Intel vs Trump’s claims

At the NATO summit in The Hague on Wednesday, President Trump maintained his position that the attacks had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

“I believe they didn’t have a chance to get anything out,” Trump said, countering reports that Iran had evacuated key materials from the Fordow facility prior to the attack. “That place is demolished. Those targets were hit perfectly.”

But according to US officials cited by The New York Times and CNN, the DIA believes Iran had prior warning of the strike, allowing the country to move valuable nuclear material and personnel out of harm’s way. The entrances to two facilities were blocked, but the underground enrichment areas—designed to withstand severe attacks remain structurally intact.

Mehdi Mohammadi, an adviser to Iran’s parliamentary leadership, confirmed soon after the strikes that the Fordow site had been evacuated days in advance. “No irreversible damage was sustained,” he said.

Political fallout and conflicting messages

While Trump and members of his administration insist the mission was a “spectacular military success,” the intelligence community appears more cautious.

At the United Nations Security Council, the US claimed the strikes had “degraded” Iran’s nuclear capability, a more restrained position than Trump’s assertion that the programme was “completely and totally obliterated.”

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth echoed the president’s language in a statement to Reuters, saying, “Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot… the impact is buried under a mountain of rubble.”

However, the DIA’s report starkly contradicts this view, noting that Iran could likely regain access to the damaged facilities within months, and that its centrifuges were “largely intact.”

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also weighed in, with Director-General Rafael Grossi stating that while no one had yet fully assessed the extent of underground damage at Fordow, the IAEA expected it to be “significant”—though still far from conclusive.

What was targeted?

The Fordow facility, buried deep within the mountains of northwest Iran, is considered one of the most secure and strategically important sites in the country’s nuclear infrastructure. Natanz is Iran’s largest and best-known enrichment site, and Isfahan houses a major uranium conversion facility and fuel fabrication plants.

The US military reportedly deployed 14 of its most powerful bunker-busting bombs GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators (MOPs), each weighing over 13,000kg and launched cruise missiles from submarines to strike the targets.

Yet, according to officials briefed on the DIA’s assessment, the blasts were only partially successful. They failed to destroy Iran’s deeper bunkers or affect the core materials needed to resume enrichment activities.

Trump dismisses Intel, slams media

Following the publication of the DIA assessment, President Trump lashed out at the media and intelligence community on his Truth Social platform, calling CNN and The New York Times “fake news” and accusing them of attempting to sabotage one of the “most successful military strikes in history.”

He further criticised the anonymous intelligence sources quoted in the reports as “low-level losers,” and reaffirmed his confidence in the outcome of the mission.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt also dismissed the DIA report as “flat-out wrong,” accusing unnamed individuals in the intelligence community of leaking false assessments to discredit Trump’s leadership and the efforts of the US military.

Strategic implications

The revelation that Iran’s programme may remain largely intact despite the high-profile military operation could have far-reaching implications for international diplomacy, especially as the US prepares for potential direct negotiations with Tehran.

It also raises fresh concerns about the credibility of US intelligence reporting and the transparency of Trump’s administration in matters of national security.

Back in March, then-Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard told Congress there was no evidence Iran was actively developing a nuclear weapon. Despite this, Trump has insisted for weeks that Iran was “very close” to having one.

Whether the recent strikes will meaningfully delay Iran’s nuclear ambitions remains unclear. Analysts warn that any long-term impact will depend more on diplomatic efforts and inspections than military action.

As one unnamed US official told CNN, “You can bomb a facility, but you can’t bomb away knowledge.”