| President Donald Trump publicly contradicted his Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, on Tuesday, asserting that Iran was “very close” to developing a nuclear weapon when Israel launched airstrikes against its facilities last week.
The remarks, made aboard Air Force One, dismissed Gabbard’s March congressional testimony that US intelligence assessed Iran was not actively pursuing a nuclear weapon.
“I don’t care what she said. I think they were very close to having one,” Trump told reporters.
Gabbard, testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 25, said, “The IC [Intelligence Community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon and Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has not authorised the nuclear weapons programme he suspended in 2003.”
She noted Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile was at unprecedented levels for a non-nuclear state but emphasised no active weaponisation efforts were underway.
Israel’s recent strikes, which began June 13, targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities, including the Natanz enrichment site, alongside military and scientific locations.
Israeli officials claimed the attacks were pre-emptive, warning Iran was nearing nuclear weapon capability.
However, US intelligence paints a different picture, estimating Iran is up to three years from producing and delivering a nuclear weapon, according to four sources familiar with the assessment.
A senior US official told CNN that Iran is “about as close as you can get before building” a weapon, possessing necessary components if it chose to proceed.
Despite Israel’s efforts, US officials believe the strikes may have delayed Iran’s nuclear programme by only months. Significant damage was inflicted on Natanz, but the fortified Fordow enrichment facility remains largely unscathed.
Defence experts note Israel lacks the capability – specifically US-provided bunker-busting bombs and B-2 bomber support – to neutralise Fordow effectively.
“Israel can render those facilities inoperable, but dismantling them requires either a US military strike or a diplomatic deal,” said Brett McGurk, a former Middle East diplomat and CNN analyst.
The situation poses a dilemma for the Trump administration, which seeks to avoid entanglement in a Middle East conflict.
While Trump has emphasised he does not want US involvement in Israel’s campaign against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, sources indicate American military assistance would be crucial for Israel to fully dismantle Iran’s programme.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned Israel’s strikes, vowing a “decisive and proportional” response. The attacks, which also targeted senior officials, have heightened regional tensions, with oil prices surging 2% amid fears of supply disruptions.
Trump iterated his stance that “Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” expressing reluctance to negotiate further, stating he wants Iran to “give up entirely.”
The public dispute between Trump and Gabbard underscores internal administration tensions and differing interpretations of intelligence, complicating US policy as the Iran-Israel conflict escalates.
Source: CNN
| 
