Trump disavows spy chief Gabbard's take on Iran's nuclear program
US President Donald Trump said on Friday that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard was wrong in suggesting there was no evidence Iran is building a nuclear weapon.
Trump contested intelligence assessments relayed earlier this year by his spy chief that Tehran was not building a nuclear weapon when he spoke with reporters at an airport in Morristown, New Jersey.
'She's wrong,' Trump said.
In March, Gabbard testified to Congress that the US intelligence community continued to believe that Tehran was not building a nuclear weapon. 'The [intelligence community] continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon,' she said.
On Friday, Gabbard said in a post on the social media platform X that: 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly. President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree.'
She said the media has taken her March testimony 'out of context' and was trying to 'manufacture division.'
The White House has said Trump would weigh involvement in the Iran–Israel conflict over the next two weeks. On Tuesday, Trump made similar comments to reporters about Gabbard's assessment.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has justified a week of airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets by saying Tehran was on the verge of having a warhead.
Iran denies developing nuclear weapons, saying its uranium enrichment program is only for peaceful purposes.
In March, Gabbard also described Iran's enriched uranium stockpile as unprecedented for a state without such weapons and said the government was watching the situation closely. She also said Iran had started discussing nuclear weapons in public, 'emboldening nuclear weapons advocates within Iran's decision-making apparatus.'
A source with access to US intelligence reports told Reuters the March assessment presented by Gabbard has not changed. The source said US spy services judged it would take up to three years for Iran to build a warhead with which it could hit a target of its choice.
David Albright, a former UN nuclear inspector, questioned the revised view offered by Gabbard on Friday, estimating it would take Iran at least six months to produce a crude nuclear 'device' that could not be delivered by a missile.
To produce a nuclear weapon that could be delivered on target by missile would take Iran at least one to two years, said Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security.
Trump has frequently disavowed the findings of US intelligence agencies, which he and his supporters have charged — without providing proof — are part of a 'deep state' cabal of US officials opposed to his presidency.
Gabbard, a fierce Trump loyalist, has been among the president's backers who have aired such allegations.
The Republican president repeatedly clashed with US spy agencies during his first term, including over an assessment that Moscow worked to sway the 2016 presidential vote in his favor.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Netanyahu using Iran war to stay in power ‘forever': former US president Clinton
DUBAI: Former US president Bill Clinton said Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been wanting to fight Iran for a longtime because that way he can stay in the office forever. 'Netanyahu has long wanted to fight Iran because that way he can stay in office forever and ever. I mean, he's been there most of the last 20 years,' the former president said during an appearance on 'The Daily Show'. Clinton said he called on US President Donald Trump to 'defuse' the current conflict between Israel and Iran, and end the 'outright constant killing of civilians.' 'But I think we should be trying to defuse it, and I hope President Trump will do that.' The former president said he does not think either Netanyahu or Trump want to trigger a full-scale regional disaster. He also emphasized the importance of the US protecting its allies in the region, while simultaneously advocating for restraint. 'We have to convince our friends in the Middle East that we'll stand with them and try to protect them,' he stated. 'But choosing undeclared wars in which the primary victims are civilians, who are not politically involved, one way or the other, who just want to live decent lives, is not a very good solution.' The US by far has stayed out of direct action in the conflict between Iran and Israel. But it has helped Israel shoot down missiles from Tehran and has supplied it with military equipment.
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
South Korea's chief trade negotiator plans US visit June 22-27
South Korea's trade minister Yeo Han-koo will visit the United States from June 22 to 27, the trade ministry said on Saturday. The visit will include discussions with US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and the third round of bilateral technical discussions, a ministry official told Reuters. Further details about the meetings were not disclosed. 'Since a South Korea-US summit has yet to take place and key ministers have not been appointed under the new administration, negotiations are likely to focus on areas that the trade ministry can manage - excluding major issues such as defense cost - sharing and exchange rates,' Heo Yoon, an economics professor at Sogang University, said. 'Given these circumstances, reaching a comprehensive agreement on key negotiation frameworks and agendas is expected to be challenging.' South Korea, which is currently facing a 10 percent blanket tariff and a 25 percent country-specific duty temporarily paused for 90 days, agreed with the US during initial trade negotiations in late April to craft a trade deal reducing tariffs by July 8. Asia's fourth-largest economy unexpectedly contracted in the first quarter amid US President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs and domestic political unrest following former President Yoon Suk Yeol's martial law decree in December.
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
Battle of Bunker Hill: US commemorates 250th anniversary of ‘great American battle'
As the US marks the 250th anniversary of the Battle of Bunker Hill, it might take a moment — or more — to remember why. Start with the very name. 'There's something percussive about it: Battle of Bunker Hill,' says prize-winning historian Nathaniel Philbrick, whose 'Bunker Hill: A City, A Siege, A Revolution' was published in 2013. 'What actually happened probably gets hazy for people outside of the Boston area, but it's part of our collective memory and imagination.' 'Few 'ordinary' Americans could tell you that Freeman's Farm, or Germantown, or Guilford Court House were battles,' says Paul Lockhart, a professor of history at Wright University and author of a Bunker Hill book, 'The Whites of Their Eyes,' which came out in 2011. 'But they can say that Gettysburg, D-Day, and Bunker Hill were battles.' Bunker Hill, Lockhart adds, 'is the great American battle, if there is such a thing.' Much of the world looks to the Battles of Lexington and Concord, fought in Massachusetts on April 19, 1775, as the start of the American Revolution. But Philbrick, Lockhart and others cite Bunker Hill and June 17 as the real beginning, the first time British and rebel forces faced off in sustained conflict over a specific piece of territory. Bunker Hill was an early showcase for two long-running themes in American history — improvisation and how an inspired band of militias could hold their own against an army of professionals. 'It was a horrific bloodletting, and provided the British high command with proof that the Americans were going to be a lot more difficult to subdue than had been hoped,' says the Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Rick Atkinson, whose second volume of a planned trilogy on the Revolution, 'The Fate of the Day,' was published in April. The battle was born in part out of error; rebels were seeking to hold off a possible British attack by fortifying Bunker Hill, a 110-foot-high (34-meter-high) peak in Charlestown across the Charles River from British-occupied Boston. But for reasons still unclear, they instead armed a smaller and more vulnerable ridge known as Breed's Hill, 'within cannon shot of Boston,' Philbrick says. 'The British felt they had no choice but to attack and seize the American fort.' Abigail Adams, wife of future President John Adams, and son John Quincy Adams, also a future president, were among thousands in the Boston area who looked on from rooftops, steeples and trees as the two sides fought with primal rage. A British officer would write home about the 'shocking carnage' left behind, a sight 'that never will be erased out of my mind 'till the day of my death.' The rebels were often undisciplined and disorganized and they were running out of gunpowder. The battle ended with them in retreat, but not before the British had lost more than 200 soldiers and sustained more than 1,000 casualties, compared to some 450 colonial casualties and the destruction of hundreds of homes, businesses and other buildings in Charlestown. Bunker Hill would become characteristic of so much of the Revolutionary War: a technical defeat that was a victory because the British needed to win decisively and the rebels needed only not to lose decisively. 'Nobody now entertains a doubt but that we are able to cope with the whole force of Great Britain, if we are but willing to exert ourselves,' Thomas Jefferson wrote to a friend in early July. 'As our enemies have found we can reason like men, now let us show them we can fight like men also.'
