There’s still more fallout (metaphorical, not literal) from Operation Midnight Hammer, so let’s do a roundup.
Rafael Mariano Grossi, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, discussed the state of Iran’s nuclear program on Sunday on CBS News’ Face the Nation; the interview was taped Friday:
I think you can pick and choose any adjective to characterize this, but you will see that there is an agreement in describing this as a very serious level of damage. It can be, you know, described in different ways, but it’s clear that what happened in particular in Fordo, Natanz, Isfahan, where Iran used to have and still has, to some degree, capabilities in terms of treatment, conversion and enrichment of uranium have been destroyed to an important degree. Some is still standing. So there is, of course, an important setback in terms of those — of those capabilities. This is — this is clear. And now the important issue — the important thing is, what are the next steps? Now the characterization of the damage, I think we can, you know, speculate, and still, until, of course, the Iranians themselves will have to go there and sift through the, you know, rubble and look at what is the exact degree of the damage. At some point, the IAEA will have to return. Although our job is not to assess damage, but to re-establish the knowledge of the activities that take place there, and the access to the material, which is very, very important, the material that they will be producing if they continue with this activity. This is contingent on other, you see, everything is connected. This is — this is contingent on negotiations which may or may not restart, so — so what we see this here, I think we have a snapshot of- of- of a program which has been very seriously damaged, to quote Dr. Araghchi. And now what we need to focus on is on the next steps. [Emphasis added.]
Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, said on Thursday that the country’s nuclear facilities had sustained “significant and serious damages,” the first official acknowledgment of the extent of the damages caused by U.S. strikes on three nuclear sites.
The Atomic Energy Organization of Iran was still “surveilling the damages and losses,” Mr. Araghchi said in an interview with Iran’s state television. But, he added, “I have to say, the losses have not been small, and our facilities have been seriously damaged.”
[Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan “Razin”] Caine detailed the military planning that began in 2009 to design a purpose-built method to knock out the Fordow facility, which is buried hundreds of feet underground in a mountainous region of Iran.
Caine shed new light on the role of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), an organization tasked with preparing bespoke solutions to destroy highly sensitive targets, including emerging weapons of mass destruction.
“DTRA does a lot of things for our nation, but DTRA is the world’s leading expert on deeply buried, underground targets,” Caine said.
“In 2009, a Defense Threat Reduction Agency officer was brought into a vault at an undisclosed location and briefed on something going on in Iran,” Caine said, declining to identify the DTRA officer by name.
This DTRA officer, and another unnamed member of the agency, were then tasked to work with the intelligence community to study the construction of the Fordow site.
“For more than 15 years, this officer and his teammate lived and breathed this single target: Fordow, a critical element of Iran’s covert nuclear weapons program,” Caine said.
The two DTRA employees spent years studying everything from the geology surrounding Fordow, to the construction materials and other equipment arriving at the facility, so they could model the site and devise a plan.
“They literally dreamed about this target at night when they slept,” Caine said.
In the course of their study of the Fordow facility, Caine said the pair of DTRA employees leading the project soon determined the U.S. military did not have a weapon that could adequately address the challenge the fortified Iranian nuclear facility presented.
“So, they began a journey to work with industry and other tacticians to develop the GBU-57,” Caine said.
The GBU-57, also known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) or bunker-buster, is a 30,000-pound bomb designed to burrow and explode deep underground.
Military planners then spent years testing the bomb, specifically for the Fordow facility.
“They tested it over and over again. … They accomplished hundreds of test shots, and dropped many full-scale weapons against extremely realistic targets for a single purpose: kill this target at the time and place of our nation’s choosing,” Caine said.
Each GBU-57 is “bespokely” designed for a specific target. He said each one dropped on the Fordow facility “had a unique desired impact angle, arrival, final heading, and fuse” corresponding to its role in the overall mission.n addition to live-testing the GBU-57, Caine said the program to develop the heavy bunker-buster involved extensive and complex computing.
“In the beginning of its development, we had so many PhDs working on the MOP program, doing modeling and simulation, that we were quietly and in a secret way, the biggest users of supercomputer-hours within the United States of America,” he said.
Snip.
While Caine said the intelligence community is still assessing the true damage of the U.S. strike, he indicated military planners are confident the strike was successful, based on their understanding of the weapons they used, and the fact that each weapon was observed acting as it was intended.
“The weapons were built, tested, and loaded properly,” he said. “Two, the weapons were released on-speed and on-parameters. Three, the weapons all guided to their intended targets and to their intended aim points. Four, the weapons functioned as designed, meaning they exploded.”
Caine also described the account of a U.S. fighter pilot who escorted the bomber formation and watched the bomb blasts, who Caine quoted as saying, “This was the brightest explosion that I’ve ever seen. It literally looked like daylight.”
Snip.
Hegseth then read off a list of statements, including from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission, the Iranian Foreign Ministry, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and others, assessing that the June 21 strike caused extensive damage to Iran’s nuclear program.
(Hat tip: ZeroHedge.)
For those accustomed to continental condemnation toward Israel on Gaza, European leaders’ support for the nation’s ferocious campaign to strike Iran’s nuclear program was probably one of the many shocks of the past two weeks.
Consider these statements from German Chancellor Friedrich Merz:
“There is no reason for us, or for me personally, to criticize what Israel started a week ago, nor is there any reason to criticize what America did last weekend.”
“The evidence that Iran is continuing on its path to building a nuclear weapon can no longer be seriously disputed.”
“This is dirty work that Israel is doing for all of us.”
Merz noted that the actions were not “without risk” and has since turned attention back to Gaza in calling for a cease-fire there. Reactions from other top European leaders were more qualified regarding the Israeli-U.S. operation — but still supportive of the overall goal of preventing a nuclear-armed Iran and understanding of Israel’s desire to eliminate that risk.
French President Emmanuel Macron said there was “no legality” to America’s strikes, while acknowledging France “supports the objective of preventing Iran from getting the nuclear bomb.” Earlier, he said Israeli strikes that hit “civilian or energy facilities” must stop, while conceding that Iran posed an “existential risk” for Israel. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, calling for de-escalation and negotiation, said in a video on X, “We’ve long had concerns about the Iranian nuclear program,” and described the prospect of Iran getting a nuclear weapon as “the greatest threat to stability in the region.”
A joint statement from all three leaders last weekend affirmed that Iran “can never have a nuclear weapon” and urged the country to engage in negotiations. It put the onus on Iran “not to take any further action that could destabilize the region.”
Before the American strike, even European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen “reiterated Israel’s right to defend itself and protect its people” while calling for de-escalation and restraint from both sides. NR’s Michael Brendan Dougherty, marking these “strange days,” also flagged the effusive praise for President Trump’s handling of Iran from NATO’s secretary-general.
We can infer from these reactions a few things.
One, the determinations of the International Atomic Energy Agency indeed rattled the Europeans as well as the Israelis. As NR’s original editorial on Israel’s strikes noted, “Iran had significantly ramped up its enrichment capacity, with even the U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency (not exactly friendly to Israeli militarism) having determined that Iran had been enriching uranium well beyond the level of civilian use, and closer to military grade.”
Two, Iran’s support for Russia in its war against Ukraine — via cooperation on the production of attack drones for use on the battlefield — has won Tehran few sympathizers inside Europe’s political establishment.
Three, relatedly, Europe’s well-founded fear of Iran is greater than its misgivings about Israel, given Iran’s history of targeting regime opponents there.
Israel is calling on three European countries, Britain, France, and Germany — known as the E-3 — to enact the UN Security Council’s “snapback” mechanism regarding Iran sanctions. A clause in the 2015 council resolution that endorsed that year’s Iran nuclear deal allows each of the deal parties to automatically reimpose all global sanctions on the Islamic Republic.
For now, though, “there’s murmur about snapback, but nothing more than that,” a UN-based diplomat tells the Sun. He noted that time is limited for enacting the mechanism.
America, Britain, France, Germany, Communist China, and Russia can unilaterally trigger the option, and no veto could block the snapback. Council members, however, rejected an American attempt to snap back the sanctions after President Trump left the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2018. The E-3, though, might still enact it.
There’s an easy way for Iran to avoid further bombings: Stop trying to build nuclear weapons.
