The Trump administration has doubled down on claims that its recent airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities caused “severe damage,” following leaked assessments that cast doubt on the operation’s long-term impact. The conflicting reports have sparked debate within Washington’s intelligence and defense communities over the true extent of the damage and the future of Iran’s nuclear program.

On Wednesday, CIA Director John Ratcliffe said new intelligence confirmed that key Iranian nuclear sites were “destroyed” and would take “years” to rebuild. While he did not go as far as declaring the program eliminated, he said the damage was significant enough to degrade Iran’s capabilities.

This follows a leaked preliminary assessment by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), which concluded that Iran’s nuclear program had suffered only temporary setbacks and that some operations could resume within months. The DIA also reported that much of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile had been relocated before the strikes — a claim the head of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said was plausible.

President Donald Trump, who initially hailed the use of U.S. bunker-buster bombs at the Fordow and Natanz sites as a “spectacular military success,” dismissed the DIA report and accused the media of spreading “fake news.” However, during a NATO summit in The Hague, he appeared to soften his stance, calling the intelligence “inconclusive” before later insisting the strikes had set Iran back “decades.”

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described the damage as “moderate to severe” and rejected the DIA report as inaccurate. Israeli officials have supported the U.S. position, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office stating that the Fordow facility had been rendered “inoperable” and that the joint U.S.-Israeli operation had pushed back Iran’s nuclear ambitions by years.

Independent experts, however, urged caution. Jeffrey Lewis, a nonproliferation expert at the Middlebury Institute, told the Associated Press that assessing the extent of the damage so soon after the strikes was premature. “Either it’s too early to know, or you know,” he said.

The IAEA confirmed “extensive damage” at both Natanz and Fordow, noting visible impact points and disrupted infrastructure, but also emphasized that Iran retained the technical knowledge and capacity to rebuild its program. IAEA Director Rafael Grossi urged renewed diplomatic efforts and stressed the importance of allowing inspectors back into the affected sites.

As the U.S. and Iran prepare for possible diplomatic talks following nearly two weeks of open conflict between Israel and Iran, Trump dismissed the need for a formal agreement, claiming the damage inflicted would be deterrent enough. “They’ve had it,” he said.

Meanwhile, the IAEA continues to push for long-term solutions, warning against speculative timelines and emphasizing that Iran’s capabilities cannot be assessed by damage alone.