By Mark Antonio Wright
Thursday, June 26, 2025
At this stage, I’m inclined to accept as more likely than
not the view held by the Pentagon, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and
— in my view most significantly — the Israeli government that Iran’s nuclear
weapons program was dealt a very significant blow by the air strikes ordered by
President Trump.
Americans can be forgiven for taking Donald Trump’s
emphatic pronouncements on this matter with a grain of salt or two. We have
grown very used to anything associated with Trump to be the biggest, the best,
the greatest of all time, etc. — at least when described as such by Trump
himself. When Trump told the world that the Iranian nuclear sites had suffered
“total obliteration,” it was prudent to wonder whether that meant “total
obliteration” in the Trumpian sense or “total obliteration” in the eyes of a neutral
observer.
The controversy was kicked off by the New York Times
and CNN reporting that a preliminary, classified Defense Intelligence Agency report
assessed that the bombings had set back Iran’s nuclear program by only a
few months.
That analysis has now been forcefully contradicted by the
White House press office, by Trump himself, and — in a more measured fashion —
by the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the secretaries of state and
defense.
And, again, it’s also been contradicted by the Israeli
government. That, in my view, is the most significant opinion for three
reasons: (1) it seems quite clear now that Israel had a very good intelligence
site picture on the Iranian nuclear weapons program before the campaign began,
(2) the Iran nuclear program is an existential threat to Israel, and (3) Prime
Minister Netanyahu views the destruction of the Iranian nuclear program as
fundamental to his personal legacy.
On Wednesday, Noah Rothman summed up the growing
Israeli consensus well:
The Israelis, who have a
sophisticated intelligence network throughout Iran and human sources on the
ground, believe the strikes produced “extremely severe damage and destruction” at Iran’s nuclear
sites and support facilities. “Nobody is disappointed here,” one Israeli
official told Axios’s Barak Ravid. “We doubt that these facilities can be
activated any time in the near future,” another official remarked.
To some extent, the Israeli
outlook changes depending on the person to whom you’re speaking. One unnamed
Israeli “source” told ABC News the outcome at the Fordow
enrichment plant, for example, was “really not good.” But, in that same report,
another “source with knowledge of the Israeli intelligence assessment” said the
facility had been “damaged beyond repair.”
If Israel thought that the job wasn’t finished, would the
Israeli government and Bibi really be willing to agree to a cease-fire? I think
the evidence and the history of the Israeli state tell us that they would not
be.
Regardless — and this goes whether we think Iran has been
set back months, or years, or metaphysically forever — if the ayatollahs decide
to return to working on their clandestine nuclear program, it will require
Israel and/or the United States to at some point “mow the lawn.”
The strikes look like they were a success —
and the world is better off today than it was two weeks ago, thanks to the
leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump.
But the problem of the Iranian nuclear program isn’t over
— unless, that is, the Iranians themselves want it to be.
No comments:
Post a Comment