When US President Donald Trump ordered the US military to bomb Iran’s nuclear sites over the weekend, the debate between intelligence officials, outside experts and politicians about the status of Tehran’s nuclear programme had been largely frozen for almost 20 years, The Guardian reports.
The protracted debate has repeatedly pitted the relatively soft-spoken US intelligence community against Israel and neoconservative Iran hawks since the height of the global war on terror, the British media outlet points out.
As the author of the article James Risen notes, for almost two decades, US intelligence agencies have concluded that, although Iran has a uranium enrichment programme, it has never built atomic bombs. This assessment has underpinned intelligence on Iran since at least 2007. This has led to an ongoing debate about the significance of Iran’s uranium enrichment programme versus “weaponisation” or building a bomb.
“In the past, the US intelligence community’s assessment of the state of Iran’s nuclear programme, developed in the wake of its failures to deal with weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, has constrained successive presidents from Bush to Obama to Biden. All have faced pressure from Israel to take action against Iran, or at least to allow Israel to bomb the country. The difference today is not that the intelligence has changed significantly. It is that Trump is now more willing to listen to Israel than his predecessors were, and deeply suspicious of the Central Intelligence Agency. And by firing so many National Security Council staff and carrying out an ideological purge of the rest of the national security community since he returned to office, Trump has made clear that he is not interested in listening to experts on Iran and the Middle East,” The Guardian points out.

