The White House is not ruling out the use of tactical nuclear weapons against Iran’s underground Fordow Fuel Enricment Plant (FFEP) nuclear facility, reports say, citing a White House official, also emphasized that US bunker-buster bombs remain a viable option for destroying the site.
Meanwhile, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) warned of possible severe consequences even if non-nuclear weapons are used.
Fox News correspondent Jackie Heinrich reported the nuclear weapon option on Thursday, June 19.
Recently, US President Donald Trump publicly talked about the possibility of a strike. This comes after nearly a week of conflict between Iran and Israel.
The long-range blitz began Friday, June 13, when Israel launched a massive bombing campaign that prompted Iran to respond with missiles and drones.
Jackie Heinrich’s statement contradicts a recent Guardian report claiming that the Pentagon believes only a nuclear strike could penetrate the deeply buried Fordo site – but that President Donald Trump would not authorize such a strike.
According to Fox’s Jackie Heinrich, the Trump administration sees tactical nukes as one option among several and maintains confidence in the effectiveness of conventional munitions.
Earlier, Axios reported that Trump had doubts about whether the GBU-57MOP (massive ordnance penetrator) – a 30,000 lbs (13,600 kg) “bunker buster” bomb – could reliably destroy the Fordo site, which lies nearly 90 meters underground.
The weapon is only compatible with the US Air Force B-2 “Spirit” stealth bombers employing the six-meter-long weapon one per mission from its internal weapons bay. The Center for Stategic and International Studies (CSIS) also determined that multple GBU-57s could penetrate the Fordow bunker, since a single weapon would only penetrate 60 meters, though that would possibly render the uranium centrifuges unuseable.
The Israeli Air Force has aleady dropped weapons on other nuclear facilities in Iran and the IAEA has said radiation levels are not yet elevated at another location, the Natanz site. But, in remarkes the agency published on its website, IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi gave dire warnings about the destruction of nuclear facilities.
“The level of radioactivity outside the Natanz site has remained unchanged and at normal levels indicating no external radiological impact to the population or the environment from this event,” Grossi said.
“However, due to the impacts, there is radiological and chemical contamination inside the facilities in Natanz. The type of radiation present inside the facility, primarily alpha particles, is manageable with appropriate radiation protection measures,” Grossi continued.
The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) reportedly assessed that a nuclear bomb might be needed, but only after softening the ground with conventional explosives.
According to the Wall Street Journal, Trump approved a military strike plan on Iran on June 17 but has yet to greenlight its execution. The White House hopes Tehran will abandon its nuclear program voluntarily.
On June 19, Press Secretary Caroline Leavitt said Trump would decide “within two weeks,” a common time peiod the US president uses often, whether the US will take military action. Trump previously demanded Iran’s “unconditional surrender,” which last took place in 1945 when Nazi-controlled Germany and the Empire of Japan ceded complete contro over their nations to the Allies in World War II.
The US claims it has, by way of Israel, full control of Iran’s airspace and knows the whereabouts of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Trump called him an “easy target,” but insisted Washington has “no plans to eliminate him – for now.”
In a televised response, Iran’s Khamenei said Wednesday that the country would never bow to Trump’s demands and warned that any US intervention in support of its ally would bring “irreparable damage.”
IAEA Director General Grossi gave this general warning: “All these developments are deeply concerning. I have repeatedly stated that nuclear facilities must never be attacked, regardless of the context or circumstances, as it could harm both people and the environment. Such attacks have serious implications for nuclear safety, security and safeguards, as well as regional and international peace and security.”