With the escalation of tensions in the Middle East, the world has witnessed one of the most controversial strikes in recent decades, which is the United States launched an attack on facilities Iranian nuclear program. While political and media circles were quick to talk about the “end of” Iranian nuclear ambition, the deeper strategic reading – supported by the estimates of prominent experts and scientists – shows a different image.
The satellite images, which were analyzed by specialized companies, revealed the movement of “abnormal” vehicles about the Iranian Fordo nuclear site before the strike occurred, according to the Washington Post newspaper, quoting pictures of Maxar. After the strike, the photos showed superficial damage, but no conclusive assurances about the penetration of the deep fortifications of the site or the basic collapse of the underground building. This style indicates that the strike may have targeted the surface infrastructure of the site without having a comprehensive destruction in the fortified facilities.
Official statements … ambiguity and conflicts
Official statements varied significantly about the size of the damage caused by the “strike”. From the White House, US President Donald Trump announced that the strikes were “completely successful” and that one of the used bombs had “removed”, based on preliminary information from the Pentagon. This statement suggests a great effectiveness of the process.
In contrast, an Iranian official from Qom Governorate, where Fordo website, denied severe damage, stressing that the site “was not seriously damaged.” This inconsistency in the statements increases the difficulty of evaluating the real situation and putting more question marks on the goals and actual results of the blow.
For its part, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed that no radiological leakage from the three targeted sites, which indicates that the strikes did not affect the radiological safety of the facilities. Reports issued by prestigious news sources such as Sky News and Al -Jazeera indicate that the strikes “slowed the progress of the Iranian nuclear program”, but did not stop it completely. Fordo is still a “existing threat factor”, which means that his ability to resume operations has not been completely destroyed.
An official Israeli source admitted that the strike “slowed the program from two to 3 years at most,” but he acknowledged that “this does not mean its completion,” according to Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar on the same day that the United States launched a blow to the Iranian nuclear reactor, in an interview with “Times of Israel”.
A painful blow, not a judge
Until the hour of writing this report, press and investigative reports are being circulated from Guardian, Haretz and “NBC” that the strikes hit facilities about Fordo, but they did not confirm the penetration of the entire fortifications, while satellite images indicated “superficial damage” in some parts of the complex, not a comprehensive collapse.
After analyzing the available information, it is clear that there are no conclusive evidence of “complete destruction” or the collapse of the underground facility in Fordo. It seems that the strike caused damage to limited results, perhaps that led to the loss of energy or refrigeration systems, but it left the structure of the fortifications intact, according to the analyzes of those newspapers and according to the information available for it.
It is reported that in a pre -emptive report published by the Washington Post on June 17, before the strike, military analysts indicated that the Fordo facility, due to its geological depth, may not be fully destroyed even by using supernatural bombs. These estimates came to justify later – after the strike – the reason that Washington was not announced about the complete elimination of the site, but rather by talking about slowing the Iranian program.
Nuclear expert David Alfreit of the “International Science and Security Institute” (ICIC) we do not see irreversible destruction in Fordo … as long as the underground shelters operate, Iran has a nuclear clock that silently beats.
He also pointed out that the super weapons (MOB) was not used in full effectiveness, which made the strike “decisive strategically”.
Scientific knowledge is not bombed
Scientific experts point out that the Iranian nuclear program is not just central expelling devices or concrete facilities, but rather a cognitive structure consisting of thousands of nuclear engineers and physicists, and an infrastructure for design and development distributed on a wide geographical scale.
Nuclear expert Matthew Bonn from the Balfar College at Harvard University, “Military strikes may push Iran to convince that nuclear deterrence is the only way to survive … The armament project has rushed instead of its slowdown,” according to the Balfir Center report.
Even the most optimistic Israeli assessment, such as the Israeli Hume newspaper report (June 20, 2025), describes the strike as a “slowing down, not eradicating.” Iran’s ability to reinstall the technical structure is high, thanks to the availability of alternative expelling devices, support from allies (Russia and China), and a parallel supply network through intermediaries.
Do we witness nuclear silence?
What happened in the American strike, then, is a “miserable but unsafe” blow, according to the expression of an energy expert. Facilities were damaged, the material structure was shaken, and artistic steps may have slowed down. But the indicators say that the program has not ended, because it is not just structures, but rather a human knowledge buried underground, and in minds.
Some observers believe that the strike may be – unexpectedly – a motive for Iran to turn from a “monitoring” program to a more secret and fundamental program.
Perhaps the most prominent strategic lesson here is that the real battle is not on maps, but in minds, laboratories and political intentions. Perhaps the more military pressure, Iran moved from the logic of negotiation to the logic of “nuclear silence”. It is likely that the options will withdraw Iran from international negotiations, and cover its program with mystery, and this may be an indication that Tehran may go on a path other than negotiation.
The saying that the end of the Iranian nuclear program is nothing but declaring a political desire, not a strategic truth. Most of the program was not eradicated, but rather temporarily stopped, or was forced to change its shape, no more.