Doubts on Iran's Atomic Bomb: US Intelligence Agencies Question Israeli Justification
Int intelligence agencies express reservations about Israel's reasons for launching strikes against Iran
In a surprising twist, assessments by American intelligence agencies contest the Israeli government's claims that Iran is hurtling towards the development of an atomic bomb. This comes as Israel has been bombarding Iran with rockets since the last week, citing the need to disrupt a nuclear program they claim has surpassed an "irreversible threshold."
However, the findings of US intelligence agencies paint a different picture, as reported by CNN, quoting four sources familiar with the analysis. Contrary to the Israeli claims, Iran is not only not actively focused on creating a nuclear weapon, but it is also approximately three years away from being able to produce and potentially deliver one to other nations. If true, the justification given by the Netanyahu administration for the ongoing attacks appears questionable at best.
US-Israel Relations: A Murky Relationship
The US Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, previously expressed her views to the Senate Intelligence Committee. However, President Donald Trump dismissed her statement. "I don't care what she said. I believe they were about to have it," AP quoted Trump.
But the US intelligence agencies aren't only expressing reservations about the urgency; they are also questioning the effectiveness of the current Israeli attacks. An official told CNN that the nuclear program would be delayed by only a few months. While the uranium enrichment facility in Natanz was significantly damaged, the heavily fortified one in Fordo remained largely untouched. According to US experts, Israel does not possess the capabilities to destroy the Fordo facility.
Global Reaction and the Role of Military Intervention
Brett McGurk, a Middle East expert and former diplomat, concluded in a CNN analysis, "Israel can fly over these nuclear facilities and render them inoperable, but if you want to destroy them, you either have to carry out a US military strike or reach an agreement."
The US, with President Donald Trump repeatedly emphasizing that it does not desire active participation in the war, is in a complex position. On one hand, sources informed CNN that the US government is aware that only with its military support can the Iranian nuclear program be put to a halt. Some hawks in the US government are also advocating for military assistance to Israel. Yet, Trump publicly called on Iran to sign an agreement.
Fueling Tensions: The Arrival of a Second US Aircraft Carrier
Recent disagreements between US intelligence agencies and the US Central Command (CENTCOM) have led to debates about the timeline for Iran's nuclear capabilities. Even within CENTCOM, officials had suggested that Iran could reach an operational nuclear bomb faster than initially expected. In response, some military officials have called for increased resources for the Middle East, emphasizing the need for protection of their troops and potential support for Israel. However, the US military would only intervene in cases of defense and not aid Israel's offensive actions.
In light of these ongoing tensions and potential risks, the US is deploying a second aircraft carrier to the Middle East. The "USS Nimitz" and its accompanying ships will be diverted from their current position in Asia to backup the "USS Carl Vinson" in the Middle East, according to reports by CNN and NBC News.
[1] ntv.de[2] Overall information derived from enrichment data
- The ongoing tensions between Iran and Israel over nuclear energy have sparked debates within the US government, with US intelligence agencies expressing reservations about the Israeli attacks' effectiveness and questioning the need for military intervention in war-and-conflicts, as well as the timeline for Iran's potential nuclear capabilities in general-news.
- Despite the doubts cast by US intelligence agencies on the immediacy of Iran's nuclear energy development, the US continues to monitor the situation closely, with a focus on community policy, specifically the potential need for military intervention and the timeline for Iran's nuclear energy capabilities, as political decisions in these areas could significantly impact global news and international relations.
