Donald Trump targets Iran's nuclear programme with B-2 bomber strikes
He is betting that the United States can repel whatever retaliation Iran's leadership orders against more than 40,000 US troops spread over bases throughout the region. All are within range of Tehran's missile fleet, even after eight days of relentless attacks by Israel. And he is betting that he can deter a vastly debilitated Iran from using its familiar techniques – terrorism, hostage-taking and cyber attacks – as a more indirect line of attack to wreak revenge.
Most importantly, he is betting that he has destroyed Iran's chances of ever reconstituting its nuclear programme. That is an ambitious goal: Iran has made clear that, if attacked, it would exit the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and take its vast programme underground.
That is why Trump focused so much attention on destroying Fordo, the facility Iran built in secret in the mid-2000s that was publicly exposed by President Barack Obama in 2009. That is where Iran was producing almost all of the near bomb-grade fuel that most alarmed the United States and its allies.
Trump's aides were telling those allies on Saturday night (UST) that Washington's sole mission was to destroy the nuclear programme. They described the complex strike as a limited, contained operation akin to the special operation that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011.
'They explicitly said this was not a declaration of war,' one senior European diplomat said, describing his conversation with a high-ranking administration official.
But, the diplomat added, bin Laden had killed 3000 Americans. Iran had yet to build a bomb.
In short, the administration is arguing that it was engaged in an act of pre-emption, seeking to terminate a threat, not the Iranian regime. But it is far from clear that the Iranians will perceive it that way.
In a brief address from the White House on Saturday night (UST), flanked by Vice-President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defenve Secretary Pete Hegseth, Trump threatened Iran with more destruction if it does not bend to his demands.
'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace,' the President said. 'If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier.'
'There will be either peace,' he added, 'or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. Remember, there are many targets left.'
He promised that if Iran did not relent, he would go after them 'with precision, speed and skill'.
In essence, Trump was threatening to broaden his military partnership with Israel, which has spent the last eight days systematically targeting Iran's top military and nuclear leadership, killing them in their beds, their laboratories and their bunkers. The United States initially separated itself from that operation. In the Trump administration's first public statement about those strikes, Rubio emphasised that Israel took 'unilateral action against Iran', adding that the United States was 'not involved'.
But then, a few days ago, Trump mused on his social media platform about the ability of the US to kill Iran's 86-year-old supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, any time he wanted. And Saturday night, he made clear that the US was all-in and that, contrary to Rubio's statement, the country was now deeply involved.
Now, having set back Iran's enrichment capability, Trump is clearly hoping that he can seize on a remarkable moment of weakness – the weakness that allowed the American B-2 bombers to fly in and out of Iranian territory with little resistance.
After Israel's fierce retaliation for the October 7, 2023, terror attacks that killed over 1000 Israeli civilians, Iran is suddenly bereft of its proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah. Its closest ally, Syria's Bashar Assad, had to flee the country. And Russia and China, which formed a partnership of convenience with Iran, were nowhere to be seen after Israel attacked the country.
That left only the nuclear programme as Iran's ultimate defence. It was always more than just a scientific project – it was the symbol of Iranian resistance to the West, and the core of the leadership's plan to hold on to power.
Along with the repression of dissent, the programme had become the ultimate means of defence for the inheritors of the Iranian revolution that began in 1979. If the taking of 52 American hostages was Iran's way of standing up to a far larger, far more powerful adversary in 1979, the nuclear programme has been the symbol of resistance for the last two decades.
One day, historians may well draw a line from those images of blindfolded Americans, who were held for 444 days, to the dropping of GBU-57 bunker-busting bombs on the mountainous redoubt called Fordo. They will likely ask whether the United States, its allies or the Iranians themselves could have played this differently.
And they will almost certainly ask whether Trump's gamble paid off.
His critics in Congress were already questioning his approach. Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said Trump had acted 'without consulting Congress, without a clear strategy, without regard to the consistent conclusions of the intelligence community' that Iran had made no decision to take the final steps to a bomb.
If Iran finds itself unable to respond effectively, if the Ayatollah's hold on power is now loosened, or if the country gives up its long-running nuclear ambitions, Trump will doubtless claim that only he was willing to use America's military reach to achieve a goal his last four predecessors deemed too risky.
But there is another possibility. Iran could slowly recover, its surviving nuclear scientists could take their skills underground and the country could follow the pathway lit by North Korea, with a race to build a bomb. Today, North Korea has 60 or more nuclear weapons by some intelligence estimates, an arsenal that likely makes it too powerful to attack.
That, Iran may conclude, is the only pathway to keep larger, hostile powers at bay, and to prevent the United States and Israel from carrying out an operation like the one that lit up the Iranian skies Sunday morning.
This article originally appeared in the New York Times.
Written by: David E. Sanger
Photographs by: Carlos Barria / Getty Images
©2025 NEW YORK TIMES
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
an hour ago
- Scoop
Luxon's Complicity Puts Aotearoa At Risk: Te Pāti Māori Stands Against Global Military Aggression
Te Pāti Māori stands firmly against the rising tide of global military aggression. While the Luxon scrambles to appease Trump and Israel, we choose peace, sovereignty, and an independent foreign policy grounded in justice and truth. More than 56,000 Palestinians have been murdered by Israel over the past 20 months. In that time, Israel have launched attacks on Iran, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen. These countries have for a long time been barriers to US imperialism in the Middle East. It is why our government remains silent on Israel, and why Judith Collins signed off on $12bn in military spending right before the US bombs Iran. 'When the US bombs Iran, Luxon calls it an 'opportunity'. But when Cook Islanders assert their sovereignty or Chinese vessels travel through international waters, he leaps to condemnation' said Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi. 'Israel continues to maintain an undeclared nuclear arsenal. Yet this Government won't say a word. It condemns non-Western powers at every turn but remains silent when its allies act with impunity.' Te Pāti Māori is reaffirming our position of military neutrality, rejecting participation in imperial alliances, foreign wars, and warmongering masquerading as diplomacy. 'You don't send planes into a war zone 'just in case.' Not without a mandate. Not without telling the people. This Government is dragging us toward World War 3, in secret, without debate, and with zero accountability.' 'Luxon's complicity is putting everyone in Aotearoa at risk.' 'Aotearoa is not a puppet of Western militarism. We do not answer to NATO. We do not answer to the Five Eyes. We answer to our people and our values' said Waititi. 'This Government speaks boldly against the East but cowers before the West. It has no credibility on international law when its outrage is selective, and its silence bought.' 'Te Pāti Māori will not be silent. We will not stand by while bombs fall, sovereignty is trampled, and innocent people are killed. Whether it's in the Middle East, the Pacific, or here at home' concluded Waititi.
NZ Herald
3 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Iranians in the US worry over conflict with Israel — and Iran's future
When Israel launched its first airstrikes against Iran last week, Mahsa Pashaei could think only of her parents. The Iranian immigrants - now United States citizens - were visiting Tehran. Amid reports of dwindling fuel supplies and road closures, Pashaei, a 33-year-old UCLA graduate student, was worried they wouldn't
The Spinoff
3 hours ago
- The Spinoff
NZDF rescue aircraft on standby as Middle East crisis deepens
New Zealand is preparing for a possible evacuation of citizens from Iran and Israel, while government ministers call for restraint, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Iran promises 'everlasting consequences' for US bomb attacks Iran has lashed out at the United States following yesterday's dramatic attack on three of its nuclear facilities, calling the bombing the first salvo in 'a dangerous war' and a 'barbaric violation' of international law. On Twitter/X, foreign minister Abbas Araghchi warned of 'everlasting consequences' and said Tehran 'reserves all options' in responding to the strikes on Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz. The International Atomic Energy Agency said there has been 'no increase in off-site radiation levels' after the airstrikes. The US attack, carried out with long-range B-2 bombers and massive 'bunker buster' bombs, was announced by Donald Trump on Truth Social, followed by a brief speech from the White House in which he claimed Iran's 'nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated'. The airstrikes came after more than a week of Israeli attacks on Iran's military infrastructure and amid growing pressure on Trump to take a harder line. Iran's response will determine whether the conflict expands further across the region. NZ prepares evacuation mission New Zealand's official response has been cautious. 'Diplomacy will deliver a more enduring resolution than further military action,' said foreign minister Winston Peters, adding that this was the 'most serious' crisis he had dealt with, reports Glenn McConnell in The Post (paywalled). Prime minister Christopher Luxon, speaking just hours before the airstrikes, stressed that 'negotiation and diplomacy' were essential, rather than 'more military action that's going to make the region more destabilised and cause more catastrophe and more human suffering'. Peters and defence minister Judith Collins announced on Sunday that an NZDF C-130 Hercules and consular personnel were being sent to the Middle East to assist in the evacuation of New Zealand citizens once airspace across the region reopens. Approximately 180 New Zealanders remain in Iran and Israel, with vanishingly few options to safely leave. New Zealand diplomats in Tehran have already left via a road convoy of diplomats from across the world into Azerbaijan, north of Iran, reports Thomas Manch in The Post (paywalled). Nato summit plans disrupted by Middle East crisis This week's Nato summit in the Netherlands is now overshadowed by the spectre of war in Iran. According to a report in Politico, world leaders had planned to present a new pledge to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP, giving Trump a major victory. Now the strike on Iran, just days before the summit, is likely to dominate discussions and potentially splinter consensus. Luxon is currently in Belgium and will attend the summit to represent New Zealand, which is a Nato partner, not member. He said New Zealand would continue to 'advocate our values' and said the right response to the crisis in the Middle East 'cannot be more military action'. Luxon's somewhat 'unlucky' China trip The escalation in the Middle East caps off a fraught fortnight for the PM, whose first official trip to China was beset by geopolitical tension and some unfortunate timing, notes RNZ's Craig McCulloch. 'Luck was not on Christopher Luxon's side', he writes, pointing to news of the Cook Islands funding row – in which China plays a key role – becoming public 'right on the eve of Luxon's big sit-down with President Xi Jinping'. The long weekend back home was more bad timing, with 'all travelling media [noting] the paltry audience interest in the stories filed as they landed on the afternoon of the public holiday Matariki'. While Luxon will no doubt hail the China trip as a success, differences between the two nations remain. One example is the status of the new China Eastern route via Auckland, which Chinese officials have described as the Southern Link, an important step in China's controversial Belt and Road Initiative that finally connects China with South America, reports Thomas Coughlan in the Herald (paywalled). Luxon rejected that characterisation, calling it a 'commercial deal' between the airline and Auckland Airport. Agreeing to disagree likely works for both sides, writes Coughlan. 'China gets to proclaim New Zealand's support for a BRI project, while New Zealand can tell BRI-sceptics like the US that it's just a flight.'
