Iran May Still Access Buried Uranium Despite US Strikes, Says Israel
Despite claims by the United States that Iranian nuclear facilities were entirely destroyed, a senior Israeli official warned that Iran could recover enriched uranium buried deep beneath its Isfahan nuclear site. This assessment challenges the dominant narrative from Washington and raises new concerns about the future of Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
Last month’s US military strikes on three of Iran’s key nuclear facilities were publicly described by President Donald Trump as a “total obliteration.” But now, in a surprising twist, intelligence from Israel suggests that may not be the case. According to this perspective, while damage was extensive, it wasn’t absolute—and more importantly, Iran might still have access to vital nuclear material.
Timeline of Events
- Last Month: The US conducts airstrikes on three Iranian nuclear sites.
- Post-strike Statements: Trump announces that “Operation Midnight Hammer” obliterated the facilities.
- Israel’s Warning: A senior Israeli official reveals concerns about recoverable uranium at Isfahan.
- Current Status: Conflicting claims from international and national authorities continue to emerge.
Israel Raises Red Flags
Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior Israeli official told reporters during a Wednesday briefing that Iran could attempt to retrieve enriched uranium that remains buried underground at Isfahan. While the task would be technically challenging, it’s not deemed impossible. The official emphasized the concentrated storage at the site:
“Most of the enriched uranium is buried at Isfahan. If Iran tried to retrieve it, we would detect it and act again,”
he warned. This comment seems aimed as much at Tehran as at the international community — a not-so-subtle reminder that Israel is watching closely and prepared to strike again if needed.
White House Holds Its Line
Despite doubts from Israeli and some US intelligence sources, the Trump administration remains firm in its messaging. White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly responded with unwavering conviction:
“As President Trump has said many times, Operation Midnight Hammer totally obliterated Iran’s nuclear facilities. The entire world is safer thanks to his decisive leadership.”
The firm stance echoes the administration’s broader foreign policy approach—direct action followed by strong public declarations of success. But does that line up with what’s actually happening on the ground?
The View from Tehran
In an interview with US host Tucker Carlson, Iranian President Mahmoud Pezeshkian painted a grim picture of the situation from inside Iran. He acknowledged that the nuclear sites were seriously damaged:
“The nuclear facilities were severely damaged. Therefore we don’t have any access to them. A full assessment is impossible as of now.”
Strikingly, Pezeshkian didn’t entirely deny the damage nor did he fully abandon the possibility that elements of the program are still viable. The ambiguity leaves plenty of room for speculation.
What the IAEA Thinks
The International Atomic Energy Agency conveyed a slightly different take. Director Rafael Grossi told CBS that while destruction was significant, it was not total:
“Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there.”
He emphasized that some parts of the facilities are still standing. That carefully worded comment is telling—it adds weight to Israel’s claims and contradicts the White House’s blanket declarations.
Iran’s Legal Defense: Peaceful Purposes
Amid all these accusations and strategic calculations, Iran continues to defend its uranium enrichment efforts as being for peaceful purposes only. Just before the US launched airstrikes, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi declared:
“This is an achievement of our own scientists. It’s a question of national pride and dignity.”
This statement reflects not just policy, but national sentiment. Regardless of whether the uranium is used for energy or weaponry, it’s clear that Iran sees its nuclear program as deeply personal, perhaps even symbolic.
Community and Global Response
The community response—from global media to online forums—has been mixed. On one end, there are expressions of relief that the nuclear program may have been halted. On the other, skepticism grows over whether things are quite that simple. Some analysts are suggesting that the strikes may have only delayed—not ended—Iran’s ambitions.
And that brings us back to what the Israeli official hinted at. If recovery efforts begin, there could be new actions. That means increased tension in the region, potential ripple effects across global oil markets, and renewed conversations in foreign policy think tanks around the globe.
What’s Next?
Honestly, it’s hard to say. The situation is fluid and, based on current reports, delicate. We’re watching three different versions of the same event unfold in real-time:
- The US version: destruction complete, mission accomplished.
- The Israeli version: significant damage, but not enough.
- The Iranian version: difficult circumstances, still assessing.
With so many conflicting reports, the truth may lie somewhere in between. What’s more certain is that no side appears ready to fully stand down. And that means the story is far from over.
As Iran begins its internal evaluations and the international community watches for any signs of recovery or reactivation, global observers will be left parsing updates, hints, and veiled statements for signs of the truth—whatever that may end up being.
One can only hope that diplomacy catches up before the next round of saber-rattling begins. Because if enriched uranium really is still within reach, the risk might not be behind us just yet.
