The CIA says it has acquired credible intelligence indicating that Iran’s nuclear infrastructure suffered severe damage during recent U.S. airstrikes, even as other American intelligence agencies offer more cautious evaluations of the operation's success.

In a rare public statement on Wednesday, CIA Director John Ratcliffe said a “body of credible evidence” suggests Iran’s nuclear program has been “severely damaged” following coordinated U.S. strikes on three major sites last Saturday — Natanz, Fordow, and Esfahan.

Ratcliffe cited “new intelligence from a historically reliable source” suggesting key nuclear facilities were destroyed and would take years to rebuild, although he stopped short of presenting detailed evidence or declaring an official CIA conclusion.

The CIA’s claim contradicts an earlier preliminary assessment by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), which reported that the strikes were unlikely to cause long-term damage and might only delay Iran’s nuclear efforts by a few months.

According to multiple sources, the DIA’s initial analysis — conducted within 24 hours of the attack — was categorized as “low confidence” and lacked coordination with the broader U.S. intelligence community. Officials familiar with the process emphasized that the full battle damage assessment (BDA) may take weeks to complete.

Phase III of the BDA, which evaluates the overall impact on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, is still underway. Analysts are relying heavily on satellite imagery, intercepted communications, and intelligence shared by allies like Israel, as U.S. personnel are unlikely to physically inspect the sites.

President Donald Trump has doubled down on his initial claims that the strikes "obliterated" Iran’s ability to build a nuclear weapon, despite the cautious early assessments. “The document said it could be limited or very severe — they really didn’t know,” Trump told reporters. “But now we’ve collected additional intelligence. We’ve spoken to people who’ve seen the site.”

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard also backed Trump’s stance, posting on social media that “Iran’s nuclear facilities have been destroyed,” although she too provided no direct evidence.

Some U.S. lawmakers and defense officials have pointed out that the strikes were never intended to completely wipe out Iran’s nuclear capacity. Republican Congressman Michael McCaul stated the operation was designed to inflict “significant damage” as a temporary setback, not a permanent dismantling.

One critical unknown is whether Iran had moved any highly enriched uranium or sensitive materials from the targeted facilities in the days leading up to the strikes. U.S. intelligence reportedly warned of possible action in advance — a fact that may have given Tehran time to respond.

Iran’s underground facility at Esfahan, in particular, remains a focus of scrutiny, with experts unsure of how much of its contents were affected.

Despite President Trump’s assertions, analysts and former officials caution against drawing firm conclusions at this stage. “Initial assessments are always subject to change,” said Jeffrey Lewis, a weapons expert at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies. “What looks like success from the air can sometimes turn out to be misinterpreted or even decoys.”

This operation is the latest flashpoint in an increasingly volatile geopolitical climate, where strategic military moves are closely entwined with information warfare and perception management. As Iran vows to retaliate and the U.S. prepares for potential fallout, much will depend on the final assessment — and whether it supports the administration’s bold claims.

Stay with WafricNews as we track intelligence updates and regional developments in the aftermath of the strikes.


By WafricNews Desk.