"Iran was not enriching uranium," U.S. intelligence also turns its back on Trump: the words of Tulsi Gabbard in the Senate

Twist in the U.S. Senate: the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, has dramatically contradicted the White House's rhetoric, stating that, after the massive attacks of June 2025, Tehran "has not attempted to rebuild" its uranium enrichment capabilities.

The hearing has undermined the narrative of President Donald Trump, who had celebrated a victory achieved "in an hour" and spoke of a regime "destroyed", just a little before "two weeks" from the atomic bomb.

The picture outlined by intelligence instead presents an image of a country severely tested, but with a political apparatus still "intact", capable of imposing discipline.

The Islamic Republic has maintained its chains of command and a surprising ability to deploy missiles and drones, despite the targeted killings of several top military figures. The central issue remains the outcome of the "12-day war".

After the widespread Israeli raids on June 13, 2025, the United States struck the symbolic sites of the nuclear program in Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan.

Trump had described those infrastructures as "completely obliterated", labeling the more cautious reports from analysts as "fake news". The technical assessments, however, confirm severe surface damage without proving the destruction of the underground facilities; the Defense Intelligence Agency thus estimates a setback of the atomic program by "months", not "years".

The paradox that emerged from the hearing is that Iran would have the industrial capabilities to restart, but lacks the political will to do so. Despite the suspension of cooperation with IAEA inspectors since July 2025, no reactivation of sensitive supply chains has been recorded in the second half of the same year.

Even Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, in November 2025, confirmed this line, stating that the country "was no longer enriching", while asserting its right to do so. Gabbard's intervention deeply impacts U.S. strategies. On one hand, it deflates the alarmism regarding the "imminent" threat that justified Trump's new campaign, dubbed "Epic Fury"; on the other hand, it warns that the global challenge from Tehran is not over, citing the potential development of intercontinental ballistic missiles by 2035.

The divide in Washington exposes the contrast between objective data — which calls for caution in an increasingly volatile regional scenario marked by direct high-intensity clashes — and presidential triumphalism.

News of Joe Kent's resignation, head of the U.S. Counterterrorism Center, surfaced two days ago. The decision, according to reports, is linked to the war that the United States and Israel allegedly initiated with the attack on Iran on February 28. "I cannot in good conscience support the war in Iran," Kent wrote in a post on X. "Iran - he continues - did not represent an imminent threat to our country and it is clear that this war was started under pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby."