ALBAWABA – A bitter dispute reportedly broke out between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office and senior intelligence officials after security agencies refused to support claims that Iran’s nuclear program had been totally destroyed following last year’s joint U.S.-Israeli military campaign, Yedioth Ahronoth reported.
The newspaper reported that Netanyahu's administration pressured intelligence, military and security professionals to sign a document supporting public remarks by U.S. President Donald Trump, who asserted that Iran's uranium enrichment facilities had been "completely destroyed" during U.S. strikes in June 2025.
Behind closed doors, emotions flared as top intelligence officials dismissed the proposal, saying the data on hand did not support such a firm determination, the article said. Officials allegedly said that although the strikes had done extensive damage to Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, there was no professional foundation for claiming that the whole program had been obliterated.
A later declassified U.S. intelligence assessment, cited by The New York Times, came to a similar conclusion, the report stated, determining that the bombings had delayed Iran’s nuclear program but had not permanently destroyed it. The assessment, which allegedly frustrated the White House and led it to seek further support from Israeli officials for its public narrative,
Several senior intelligence figures refused to sign the draft letter, saying that intelligence evaluations should be based on evidence, not political propaganda, Yedioth Ahronoth stated. One official said "the truth will eventually come out" and that analysts could not certify conclusions until a comprehensive battle damage assessment was completed.
Israeli authorities agreed to the altered language after internal deliberations that the strikes had badly damaged crucial nuclear infrastructure and pushed Iran's nuclear program back by several years, but stopped short of saying it was destroyed. Scientists also insisted on a caveat saying the assessment would only hold if Iran was denied any access to nuclear material, pointing out that Tehran was still thought to have a considerable amount of fissile material that might underpin future nuclear development.
