Slider1
Slider2
Slider3
Slider4
previous arrow
next arrow

Archive June 22, 2025

How far will US strikes set back Iran’s nuclear programme?

The United States struck three key nuclear sites in Iran early on Sunday, injecting itself into Israel’s war with Iran in a sophisticated mission and prompting fears of military escalation in the Middle East amid Israel’s brutal onslaught of Gaza.

In a televised address early on Sunday, US President Donald Trump justified the strikes, saying they were aimed at stopping “the nuclear threat” posed by Iran. Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow sites, which are involved in the production or storage of enriched uranium, were targeted.

“Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated,” he said, warning Tehran against retaliation.

Israel and Trump claim that Iran can use the enriched uranium to make atomic warheads. But Iran insists its nuclear programme is solely for civilian purposes. The United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has also rejected Israeli claims that Iran was on the verge of making nuclear weapons.

Condemning the strikes, which US officials said were highly coordinated, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that the time for diplomacy had passed and that his country had the right to defend itself.

“The warmongering, a lawless administration in Washington, is solely and fully responsible for the dangerous consequences and far-reaching implications of its act of aggression,” he said at a news conference in Istanbul, Turkiye.

Iranian officials, meanwhile, have not detailed the extent of the damage and have attempted to downplay the significance of the hits. Speaking on state TV, Hassan Abedini, the deputy political director of Iran’s state broadcaster, said the three nuclear sites had been evacuated “a while ago” and that they “didn’t suffer a major blow because the materials had already been taken out”.

Here’s what to know about the nuclear plants hit and what the attacks mean for Iran:

Which facilities were hit?

Trump on Sunday said a full payload of bombs “obliterated” Iran’s Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites. Iranian officials, according to the Reuters news agency, also confirmed that the three facilities were hit.

  1. Fordow is an underground enrichment facility in operation since 2006. Built deep inside the mountains some 48km (30 miles) from the Iranian city of Qom, north of Tehran, the site enjoys natural cover. The primary focus of Sunday’s strikes, Fordow was hit with 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOPs) or “bunker-buster” bombs delivered from B-2 stealth bomber planes, US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in a briefing on Sunday. The 13,000kg (28,700lb) GBU-57 MOP is the most powerful bunker-buster bomb, able to penetrate 60m (200 feet) below ground and delivering up to 2,400kg (5,300lb) of explosives, while the bombers are hard to detect. Israel had earlier attacked Fordow on June 13, causing surface damage, but security analysts believe only US bunker busters can penetrate the facility. An independent assessment of the scale of the damage is not yet available.
  2. Natanz is considered the largest nuclear enrichment facility in Iran, located about 300km (186 miles) south of Tehran. It is believed to consist of two facilities. One is the Pilot Fuel Enrichment Plant (PFEP), which is a test and research facility located above ground and used to assemble centrifuges, rapidly rotating machines used for uranium enrichment. According to the non-profit Nuclear Threat Initiative, the facility had close to a thousand centrifuges. The other facility, located deep beneath the ground, is the Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP). US Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Dan Caine said on Sunday that “more than two dozen” Tomahawk missiles were fired at Natanz and Isfahan. US media earlier reported the missiles were launched by submarines.
  3. Isfahan is an atomic research facility located in the central city of Isfahan. It was built in the 1970s and was used for uranium conversion. It was the last location hit before the US bombing mission, which involved about 125 aircraft, withdrew from the Iranian airspace, according to officials. Hegseth said the Iranians did not detect the mission and were notified afterwards.

Are the sites destroyed?

Independent impact assessment of the US strikes at Fordow remains unclear.

Hegseth on Sunday said the US’s “initial assessment is that all our precision munitions struck where we wanted them to strike and achieved the desired effect”, citing particular damage at Fordow.

An Iranian lawmaker told Al Jazeera that the site suffered superficial damage. Israeli strikes on the plant last week only caused “limited, if any, damage” at the underground plant, according to IAEA boss Rafael Grossi.

The extent of damage at Natanz is also unclear following Sunday’s strike. Earlier Israeli attacks “completely destroyed” the above-ground plant, and caused centrifuges in the underground parts of the uranium plant to be “severely damaged if not destroyed altogether”, even though it was not directly hit, Grossi told reporters last week.

Meanwhile, the IAEA said on Sunday that six buildings at Isfahan suffered damage following the US attacks, including a workshop handling contaminated equipment. Earlier Israeli strikes had damaged four buildings on the site, the agency had reported, including the plant’s central chemical laboratory.

Initial reports from Iran and neighbouring Gulf countries such as Kuwait further indicate that there is no significant leakage of radioactive material from any of the plants. That could suggest that Iranian officials might have moved the stockpiles of enriched uranium out of the facilities targeted by the US, analysts say.

According to the IRNA news agency, Reza Kardan, the deputy director of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran and the head of the National Nuclear Safety System Center in the country, confirmed on Sunday that “no radiation contamination or nuclear radiation has been observed outside” the sites.

“Preliminary plans had been made and measures had been taken to protect the safety and health of the dear people of the country, and despite the criminal actions this morning in attacking nuclear facilities, due to the previously planned measures and the measures taken, no radiation contamination or nuclear radiation has been observed outside these sites and facilities,” Kardan said.

The IAEA also said the radiation levels near targeted sites had not increased.

“Following attacks on three nuclear sites in Iran – including Fordow – the IAEA can confirm that no increase in off-site radiation levels has been reported as of this time,” the agency said in a social media post on Sunday.

Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, says it is likely Iran had taken precautionary actions ahead of the US attacks.

“It appears that they already had gotten an advanced warning,” he told Al Jazeera.

“They understood that he [Trump] was buying time while moving military assets in order to actually strike. So, I think for some time they have moved those assets – where they are is unclear at this point.”

Will this derail Iran’s nuclear efforts?

The impact of the strikes on Iran’s overall nuclear programme is yet unknown.

However, analysts say there was no clear evidence that Iran had advanced so far as to be able to reach weaponisation in its nuclear programme in the first place.

Parsi said Iran’s most valuable nuclear asset is its stockpile of enriched uranium.

“As long as they continue to have that, they still actually have very much a nuclear programme that still could be weaponised,” he added.

“And I think we are going to start to hear from the Israelis in rather short order, that this was not the type of successful strike Trump has claimed, but they are going to start making the case that there needs to be a more ongoing bombing campaign against Iran.”

Has Iran’s nuclear programme suffered setbacks before?

  • Yes. Iran’s nuclear ambitions started back in the 1950s under the leadership of the Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, a close ally of the US and Israel. The shah’s original vision was to build Iran’s nuclear capacities for both energy generation and, to a lesser extent, weapons manufacturing. The US, Germany, and France all supported the country with aid and technology. However, following the Islamic Revolution of 1979, the new government, under leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, halted or paused parts of the programme, arguing that it was expensive and that it represented Iran’s continued reliance on Western technology.
  • Shelved or cancelled programmes further took a hit during the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988) when the country was forced to divert resources to the war effort after Iraq’s invasion. Its Bushehr nuclear reactor site, which was under construction as part of a partnership with the industrial manufacturing giant Siemens, was bombed severely by Iraq and was left in near-total damage. Siemens eventually withdrew from the project. The government would later on reportedly restart the nuclear programme, although Iranian leadership has always insisted it is pursuing nuclear power for civilian use.
  • Stuxnet – a computer virus developed by Israel and the US, likely launched back in 2005 but discovered in 2010 – caused extensive damage to Iran’s nuclear capabilities. The programme, nicknamed Operation Olympic Games, compromised the Iranian network and caused centrifuges to tear themselves apart. It reportedly expanded rapidly under former US President Barack Obama, but began during the administration of US President George W Bush.
  • Under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (officially known as Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA), the country was forced to limit its enrichment capabilities in exchange for sanctions relief. The deal, signed between Iran, China, Russia, the US, France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the European Union, capped enrichment at 3.67 percent. Sanctions, some of them in place since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, were gradually removed. Tehran complied with the terms of the deal, according to the (IAEA). It also agreed to allow the IAEA regular monitoring access. However, Trump pulled out of the agreement during his first term as US president in 2018, and slapped on sanctions as part of a “maximum pressure” campaign, forcing Tehran to also discard the terms though it continued to cooperate with the IAEA.

Marquez wins in Mugello to extend MotoGP lead

Images courtesy of Getty

Marc Marquez won the MotoGP title to increase his position at the top of the standings for riders.

The Spaniard had already won the sprint race on Saturday and set a new record for the top 100 pole positions at the Mugello circuit for Sunday.

Marquez, his brother Alex, and home favorite Francesco Bagnaia made a breathless start by swapping positions right away.

On lap nine, when Bagnaia’s lead was reclaimed, Marc Marquez pulled away from the race to take the chequered flag.

It’s an “amazing feeling,” Marc Marquez remarked. It’s great to have three Ducatis on the podium because we are at a Ducati track and I know it’s very special for them.

I was attacked by Francesco Bagnaia and Alex Marquez from beginning, but I was calm and happy to get the points.

Fabio di Giannantonio, a fellow Italian, dropped to third place after Bagnaia was attempting to win four straight at his home grand prix.

related subjects

  • Motorsport

Mind games are part of Lions’ folklore – and here we go again

Images courtesy of Getty

Verbal jousting on British and Irish Lions tours is as much a part of the deal as the rugby itself – and the mind games started anew in recent days.

On the one hand, there is Kiwi-based wallaby coach Joe Schmidt, and Australian Lions general manager of performance David Nucifora. The psychological battles have already begun.

Schmidt described Sione Tuipulotu (Melbourne-born) and Bundee Aki (Auckland-born) as the “southern hemisphere centre partnership” in the Lions ‘ opener against Argentina on Friday night. They are, too. But was it a meandering or a little edged comment? Bet the house on the latter.

He would be well aware that some in Lionsland, particularly the great Willie John McBride, are sensitive to this subject, and that he is not interested in the number of “fremers” playing for the Lions. Two South African-born players, three from Australia, and four from New Zealand, make up the squad.

Nucifora had a little jibe of his own, all before the Lions plane took off for Perth. There will be a lot of mental games going on, I’m sure of it. he stated to the Daily Telegraph, referring to Lions’ “mental spar.”

He called Schmidt a “deep thinker” which he is. He continued, “Sometimes, you’ll find yourself perplexed if you think too deeply.” So hopefully he gets perplexed by overthinking things. Another grenade thrown.

We have an excellent witness in South Africa’s willingness to sacrifice for 1896, but it’s difficult to pinpoint the exact moment when mind games started on Lions tours.

Walter Carey, an English tour, was there. As well as being a rugby player he became the Bishop of Bloemfontein in later life, so if a man of the cloth says that the trash talking began in 1896 then who are we to argue?

One of the psychological tricks featured a man they would play in upcoming games, according to Carey. According to Carey, “We were informed that the great Jack Orr, who is supposedly a regular man-killer, was waiting to put us all in the hospital.”

Shots fired, as we say these days. Prior to Orr’s ability to annihilate anyone, he got injured, so mercifully, nobody ended up in the emergency room.

JavaScript must be enabled in your browser to play this video.

Erasmus and the hour-long video of woes – South Africa 2021

A mind game played against the Lions, not directly against them, but one that was psychologically predominated by the officials who had the final say in the second and third Tests.

The Springbok director of rugby, Nic Berry, and his assistants went to war with the Lions by videoattacking them after winning the first Test in 2021.

He used 26 clips that, to his eyes, showed injustice against the Boks on the part of Berry and his colleagues. He also claimed that Berry had treated the two captains differently, claiming that Siya Kolisi, the captain of the Bok, lacked the same respect as Lions captain Alun Wyn Jones, adding to myriad other accusations of poor decision-making.

Hansen tries to kill the Lions in 2017’s New Zealand with kindness.

Mind games come in different shapes and sizes and in 2017 in New Zealand, the All Blacks coach came at it on multiple fronts.

He attempted to expect them by love-bombing them and praising them for how excellent they were. He claimed that this is the best British and Irish Lions team he has seen play here in a very long time.

Like all good mind games, there was a large degree of truth in it. The crop of 2017 was incredibly strong.

Then Hansen said, “It’s going to be a very good side and they’ll come with a lot of expectation, which is going to be interesting to watch how they handle that… a lot more expectation than they’ve been used to, because people expect them to win.”

The ‘ kindness ‘ didn’t last, of course. Hansen spoke more fluently the more the Lions looked. He criticized their play, questioned their demanding schedule, and expressed regret over the tour’s decision to not select England’s Dylan Hartley.

Approaching the Test series he said: “We’ll see if he]Gatland] has anything up his sleeve apart from his arm”. Everyone could see that the Lions had plenty going for them, and that was pretty desperate and open-minded.

Steve Hansen and Warren Gatland shake handsImages courtesy of Getty

Andrews tries to get inside Johnson’s head with South Africa in 1997

The big Springbok lock had won the World Cup two years earlier, an achievement that appeared to confirm his legendary status in his own mind.

The admittedly brilliant Andrews remarked, “I don’t believe in false modesty.” “I can say that I’m the greatest forward in my position on earth,” I said without blushing.

He was then asked about Lions captain Martin Johnson. Andrews began to lose the plot at this point. The Bok bruiser retorted, “I’ve heard a lot about him.” “I just hope he can live up to what is written about him. If it doesn’t work out, he might become very demoralized.

Farr-Jones sounds a warning after the Battle of Ballymore – Australia 1989

Few of the crucial third Test matches could provide a dazzling preamble for the tour’s final game in 1989.

In the Battle of Ballymore, a test that featured frequent volleys and all-out rage, the Lions had won 1-1. The Australia media launched rockets at the violent tourists in the wake of the game, with a lot of justification.

Are you listening, third Test officials? asked Wallaby coach Bob Dwyer about some of the injuries his boys have sustained. – while the Australian Rugby Union held an emergency meeting to discuss the ugliness of the situation. The Wallaby captain went a lot further, though.

Before the final Test, Farr-Jones remarked, “To me, it’s basically open warfare.” They have established the guidelines. They’ve set the standards. If the officials aren’t going to control it, then we will have to do something about it, in my opinion.

The crystal-clear message warned you, and it was that. “I don’t care if I get 100 stitches as long as we are on top on the scoreboard at the end”, added the captain.

Lions and Australia clashImages courtesy of Getty

Connor writes off the Lions before they arrive – New Zealand 1971

Barry John’s tour had a bad beginning. The Lions flew to Brisbane for a warm-up game against Queensland after an incredible boozing session in Hong Kong. Exhausted from the high-living and heavy travelling, they played appallingly and lost.

Lock Gordon Brown remarked, “I wanted to lie down and die.” Gareth Edwards remarked, “We had no idea what time, day, or place it was.” “I wouldn’t say I was playing, but I was on the field”, said McBride.

Queensland coach Des Connor. He had 12 caps for Australia and 12 for the All Blacks as a player. With the Lions now heading to New Zealand for the tour proper, Connor was euphoric.

He exclaimed, “These Lions are hopeless.” “Undoubtedly the worst team to have ever arrived here.”

Er… By the mid-point of the tour the Kiwi public were shocked at how mesmeric the Lions were and by the end-point, with a historic first and still only Lions series win on New Zealand soil, they were eulogising them as the greatest team they’d ever seen.

Related topics

  • Irish Lions and British &
  • Rugby Union