Asger Risom
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth dismissed claims that Iran relocated enriched uranium before recent U.S. airstrikes, intensifying the debate over the effectiveness of the attack.
While questions persist about the true damage inflicted by U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, officials are pushing back against skepticism.
Defense Secretary Hegseth asserted there’s no intelligence indicating Tehran moved its uranium stockpile ahead of the attack.
President Trump echoed this, saying nothing was taken from the site and accused media of distorting the narrative.
Mixed intelligence and political friction
The Reuters report highlights a deepening rift between official statements and external analyses.
Satellite images showed unusual activity at Fordow prior to the strikes, and unnamed sources suggest Iran may have hidden its stockpile elsewhere.
Despite this, Hegseth maintained that no movement occurred, challenging reports that Iran’s nuclear material had been shielded.
At the Pentagon briefing, he also accused journalists of harboring anti-Trump bias, saying, “It’s in your DNA and in your blood to cheer against Trump.”
Political fallout and calls for transparency
Following the briefing, senators expressed cautious optimism but urged continued monitoring.
Republican Senator Tom Cotton called the mission “extraordinary,” while Democrat Mark Warner emphasized the need for international inspectors to verify Iran’s current capabilities.
CIA Director John Ratcliffe had earlier claimed that Iran’s program was severely damaged and would take years to rebuild.
However, key voices, including the U.N.’s Rafael Grossi, warned that technological know-how can’t be bombed away.
As Trump signals upcoming nuclear talks with Iran, who denies any meeting has been planned, the debate over what was truly accomplished continues to ripple through Washington.
