STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:
Pentagon officials gave a briefing on the U.S. attack against Iran. It seemed like two briefings. One came from General Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who was calm and detailed. He said planning for the operation was so intense that one American had been preparing for the possibilities since the Obama administration.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
DAN CAINE: For more than 15 years, this officer and his teammate lived and breathed this single target, Fordo, a critical element of Iran's covert nuclear weapons program.
INSKEEP: Caine described years of testing to prove that a 30,000-pound bomb would penetrate rock or concrete as intended before exploding. He described B-2 pilots who flew halfway around the world to drop those bombs.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
CAINE: All six weapons at each vent at Fordo went exactly where they were intended to go.
INSKEEP: This was an example of a briefing U.S. military officers often do particularly well, arguably a necessary skill in a democracy - explaining a mission so civilians can understand it and also giving credit to troops far below his rank. Caine also avoided assessing the results of the attack, saying, quote, "we do not grade our own homework." The other briefing, at the same time, in the same room, came from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. He also praised the troops but had a different focus - attacking the media.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
PETE HEGSETH: Every outlet has breathlessly reported on a preliminary assessment from DIA.
INSKEEP: President Trump disliked a Defense Intelligence Agency preliminary report that found, with low confidence, that Iranians might have moved uranium out of Fordo before the U.S. strike. NPR and others confirmed the existence of that report. When asked about this, Hegseth personally attacked one reporter, his former Fox News colleague, Jennifer Griffin, who has reliably reported on the military for decades.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)
JENNIFER GRIFFIN: Are you certain none of that highly enriched uranium was moved?
HEGSETH: Of course, we're watching every single aspect. But Jennifer, you've been about the worst, the one who misrepresents the most intentionally...
GRIFFIN: I don't think that's fair.
HEGSETH: ...What the president says.
GRIFFIN: I was the first...
HEGSETH: I'm familiar.
GRIFFIN: ...To the report about the ventilation shafts on Saturday night. And, in fact, I was the first to describe the B-2 bombers, the refueling, the entire mission with great accuracy. So I take issue with that.
HEGSETH: I appreciate you acknowledging...
INSKEEP: Obviously, Jennifer Griffin doesn't need me to defend her, but I rely on her reporting and have for years. So anyway, we're told of a technically brilliant attack, while officials sidestep a detailed analysis of whether some of Iran's program evaded destruction. What do we make of this? Jeffrey Lewis is an arms control expert at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey. Joins us now. Jeffrey, good morning.
JEFFREY LEWIS: It's good to talk to you.
INSKEEP: And, of course, it's fair not to have all the answers at this point. Based on what you know, did the attack do major damage to its targets?
LEWIS: Well, I do think that the targets were severely damaged based on all the evidence that we have. But of course, that raises the question of whether that damage is permanent, and it also raises the question of whether that really was all the targets that mattered.
INSKEEP: How could the damage not be permanent when a 30,000-pound bomb is dropped one after the other in the same place?
LEWIS: I think it turns out that when you put a bunker deep under a mountain, it can stand up to things. What I understand the DIA assessment to be is that this facility was severely damaged, but it didn't collapse. So I suppose one long-term option the Iranians might have is to dig the facility back out, although they probably have other better options that'll be quicker than that.
INSKEEP: Well, let's talk about that because there was discussion in the briefing. Hegseth says he was not aware of intelligence saying things were not where they should be, but the DIA analysis, with low confidence, said it was possible that some uranium had previously been moved somewhere else. Could the Iranians have moved material elsewhere?
LEWIS: Yes. It took the United States many days to decide to get involved, and people like me who look at commercial satellite images see pictures of trucks showing up. Some of those trucks sealed the entrances to make the place safe against attack, but other trucks may have moved the highly enriched uranium.
INSKEEP: Meaning that Iran may have things somewhere else where they could try to reconstitute or continue a nuclear program.
LEWIS: I think Iran certainly has things somewhere else where it may try to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program.
INSKEEP: Nevertheless, did they suffer a severe setback in this attack?
LEWIS: Look, I think there's a lot of damage that we see. So in one sense, this has been a severe setback. But at the same time, this was a pretty large nuclear program, and you have to hit all the bunkers, not just a couple.
INSKEEP: Jeffrey Lewis with the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, thanks so much for your insights. Really appreciate it.
LEWIS: It was a pleasure. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
