SAEDNEWS: In a direct contradiction to former President Donald Trump’s recent boast, CNN reports—citing U.S. intelligence sources—that Iran’s Isfahan nuclear facility suffered no damage in the latest American airstrikes, deepening questions over the mission’s effectiveness and Washington’s strategic messaging.
According to Saed News,
Despite high-profile claims by U.S. President Donald Trump that recent military strikes on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure were “successful,” American intelligence sources have told CNN that the Isfahan nuclear facility was not damaged in the attacks. The report further distinguishes Isfahan from the Natanz and Fordow facilities, where heavier munitions, including bunker-buster bombs, were reportedly deployed.
According to CNN’s sources, the Isfahan site—a significant node in Iran’s nuclear development chain—was not a primary target for aggressive strikes due to the perceived low probability of success. “The chances of inflicting meaningful damage on Isfahan were assessed as significantly lower compared to Natanz or Fordow,” a U.S. defense official familiar with the planning told CNN.
This revelation sharply undercuts Trump’s triumphant messaging on social media, where he had claimed that the strikes on Iran’s nuclear program were “a resounding success.” However, even The Economist previously questioned the credibility of such statements, calling the operation's outcomes “ambiguous at best.”
Analysts suggest that the restrained targeting in Isfahan may reflect U.S. concerns over crossing red lines in direct attacks on Iran’s nuclear capabilities—particularly those located near civilian areas or heavily fortified sites.
CNN’s findings raise further questions about the strategic utility of the strikes, and whether their primary aim was symbolic rather than operational. As international tension mounts, Washington’s mixed messaging may complicate diplomatic efforts to de-escalate, especially amid increasing scrutiny from watchdogs and global media.
Calls are now growing among Western analysts for a more transparent assessment of the military campaign’s real outcomes and its implications for nuclear nonproliferation goals in the region.
