Tonight I joined Steve Schmidt of The Warning and Ned Price, former State Department spokesperson and adviser, to discuss Iran.
We spoke after a leaked intelligence assessment, first reported by CNN, undermined the Trump administration’s assertions of categorical success in striking three nuclear facilities to stop Iran’s nuclear development. A senior Defense Intelligence Agency official told me by email that the leaked assessment was “a preliminary, low confidence assessment — not a final conclusion — and will continue to be refined as additional intelligence becomes available.” The official went on to write, “We have still not been able to review the actual physical sites themselves, which will give us the best indication.”
CIA John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard also came out with statements saying that the damage to Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan was severe, likely setting Iran’s nuclear program back years.
Beyond the Trump administration, nuclear expert Jeffrey Lewis told me that from the satellite images, Fordow appears to have been severely damaged. But he doubted its tunnels had collapsed. And other overt and covert nuclear facilities remain, he said.
Before the B-2s and Massive Ordnance Penetrators… the U.S. intel community assessed that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon, clashing with Israeli intelligence. And yet, Mossad Chief David Barnea was featured in a rare video out today, thanking the CIA and Ratcliffe “for the joint activity and the operations that were manifested.” The CIA declined to comment.
There are heavy, lingering questions in the wake of Operation Midnight Hammer: What will a high-confidence assessment say and will it be free of political bias? Did Iran move its uranium before the attack, and will the U.S. or Israel be able to keep track of relocated stockpiles? Does Tehran have an appetite to engage in diplomacy, and what will retaliation look like, when it finally comes to America?
Share this post