At least six Iranian nuclear sites were attacked in recent US and Israeli strikes, with most confirmed or suspected targets tied to work needed to build a nuclear weapon, a new satellite-imagery analysis by the Institute for Science and International Security shows.
The Washington-based Institute said three other attacked sites could also be nuclear-related, but there was not enough information to be certain. In total, it said six to nine recently attacked sites were nuclear-related.
The most consequential finding is that four to seven of those sites were directly, or possibly, connected to nuclear weaponization – the process of turning nuclear material into an actual bomb.
Iran’s nuclear program has two main parts. One is producing enriched uranium, the material that can be used as fuel for civilian reactors or, at much higher levels, in a nuclear weapon. The other is weaponization: designing, testing and producing the components needed to make a working bomb.
The Institute’s report suggests the latest strikes focused heavily on the second part.
It said the recent phase of the war appeared aimed less at Iran’s already damaged enrichment infrastructure and more at degrading its ability to make the weapon itself. Some of the sites hit in this phase had not previously been publicly identified, the report said, offering new insight into what it described as the extent of Iran’s nuclear weapons-related work.
Across both phases of the war – the 12-day conflict in June 2025 and the renewed fighting from February 28 until a ceasefire on April 7/8, 2026 – the Institute said nine to 12 sites involved in developing and building nuclear weapons were targeted.
The report said Iran’s major enrichment facilities remained severely damaged from the June 2025 war. It said there was no significant new damage to facilities directly associated with uranium enrichment because they had already been destroyed, and that no reconstruction or renewed enrichment had been detected.
But the Institute said the latest strikes added another layer of damage by targeting places linked to the practical work of making a bomb.
One of the most important sites was Min-Zadayi (also Minzadehei), a previously unknown complex east of Tehran.
Israel described it as a secret nuclear compound where scientists were working on a key component of a nuclear weapons system. The Institute said later reporting suggested the site may have been involved in metallurgy – likely work connected to producing the uranium metal core of a nuclear weapon.
In simple terms, that would be one of the most sensitive stages of bomb-making: taking nuclear material and preparing it in the physical form needed for a weapon.
Satellite imagery showed three large above-ground buildings destroyed at Min-Zadayi, as well as craters near hillside and possibly partially buried structures, the report said.
Another major target was Taleghan 2, inside the Parchin military complex. The site has long been associated with Iran’s past nuclear weapons work under the Amad Plan, a program believed to have been halted in its original form in 2003 but followed by later, more concealed work.
The Institute said Iran had rebuilt and heavily fortified Taleghan 2 before it was hit in March. Satellite imagery showed earth-penetrating weapons struck the facility directly. The report said the site may have contained high-explosive containment equipment.
That is significant because high explosives are central to the design of many nuclear weapons. They are used to compress nuclear material rapidly and evenly, a crucial step in producing a nuclear explosion.
The report also mentioned strikes near the Mojdeh site, also known as Lavisan 2, and at Malek Ashtar University. Both have been linked in the report to Iran’s nuclear weapons research network.
A newly built engineering-laboratory building near Mojdeh was destroyed, while a building at Malek Ashtar was described by Israel as a research and development site used to develop components for nuclear weapons production.
Other targets included the Shahid Chamran Group complex, which the Institute connected to nuclear-related research, and a building at Imam Hussein University that Israel labeled as a physics center used for Iran’s nuclear program.
The strikes also hit two sites tied to Iran’s broader nuclear fuel cycle. The Arak heavy water production plant was destroyed more thoroughly than during the June war, the Institute said. Heavy water can be used in certain types of reactors that can produce plutonium, another possible route to a nuclear weapon.
The Ardakan Yellowcake Production Plant was also rendered inoperable. Yellowcake is an early processed form of uranium. It is not bomb material, but it is a starting point for later nuclear work, including enrichment.
Enriched uranium stockpile
Despite the damage, the report does not suggest Iran’s nuclear challenge has been eliminated.
The most important unresolved issue is Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile. The Institute said tunnel complexes at Esfahan and near Natanz were not directly attacked in this phase and are believed to hold most of Iran’s enriched uranium, including about 440 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 percent.
That level is below weapons-grade, but far above what is typically needed for civilian nuclear power and much closer to the level needed for a bomb.
The Institute said Iran had sealed some tunnel entrances before the latest war and that much of the enriched uranium appears “bottled up” in places where movement would be easier to detect. But without international inspection, the exact status of the material remains unclear.
The report also said additional nuclear scientists were killed, including senior figures linked to SPND, the military research organization associated with Iran’s nuclear weapons-related work. The Institute drew a distinction between knowledge, which cannot be destroyed, and practical know-how, which can be much harder to replace in a secret weapons program.
The overall picture is therefore one of severe damage, but not finality as Iran may still possess a large stockpile of enriched uranium, and underground sites remain a central uncertainty.
The Institute’s assessment is that the attacks have increased both the time Iran would need to build a nuclear weapon and the chance that an attempt could fail. Its argument is not simply that buildings were destroyed, but that Iran lost facilities, equipment and people connected to the difficult final steps of making a usable weapon.
Trump said there was “never a deadline” for negotiations and suggested an agreement could still emerge before his planned trip to China next week, while also keeping open the possibility of renewed strikes.
His remarks followed an Axios report saying the White House believes a one-page memorandum to end the war may be within reach and could create a framework for broader nuclear talks within 30 days.
The reaction from Iranians inside and outside the country exposed deep divisions over diplomacy, military pressure and expectations surrounding Trump’s approach toward the Islamic Republic.
Comments show fatigue and distrust
Many people writing or speaking to Iran International described emotional exhaustion after months of war, economic pressure and shifting rhetoric from Washington.
“Mr. Trump, either fight like a man or leave us alone. You’ve exhausted us,” one person from Arak wrote.
Another questioned why discussions that could shape Iran’s future appeared to be taking place privately.
“If the fate of the Iranian people is being decided through this agreement, why is it happening behind closed doors?” the sender wrote. “People have the right to know what concessions are being exchanged.”
A citizen from Shiraz described the current moment as existential for many Iranians.
“The nation has endured years of sanctions and pressure and paid the price in blood like a war,” the comment read. “Every single day of delay is a matter of life and death.”
Others focused on the humanitarian and psychological toll of the conflict.
“Trump said help was on the way, but not only did no help come, the attacks led to two months of internet shutdowns,” one person wrote. “People suffered, people were killed and we became poorer.”
Another from Mashhad urged Iranians to rely on each other rather than foreign powers or the government.
“In this situation, neither the government nor America is thinking about the people,” the message said. “We Iranians should look after each other.”
Some appealed directly to opposition figures abroad.
One from Tehran called on exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi to speak with Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “so people do not lose hope.”
Others argued the confrontation remained unresolved regardless of diplomacy or ceasefire efforts.
“This battle is not over and it continues,” one person wrote. “Whether there is war, ceasefire or negotiations, the conflict still continues.”
‘Iranians lack representation in talks’
Asieh Amini, a Norway-based social affairs analyst speaking to Iran International, said assessing public opinion inside Iran has become increasingly difficult because internet restrictions and censorship have narrowed the available space for measuring sentiment.
“When we talk about the reaction of the Iranian people, naturally we should rely on polling or evidence,” Amini said. “Unfortunately because of internet shutdowns, even the virtual space that could provide a relative statistical picture no longer exists.”
Amini argued that Iran is simultaneously experiencing two separate conflicts: one between the Islamic Republic and foreign powers, and another between the Iranian state and its own citizens.
“One side has a loud voice in international media – those opposing war and criticizing Trump and Netanyahu,” Amini said. “But the second conflict, which many believe is the main war inside Iran, has no representative in these negotiations.”
Amini described that internal struggle as a long-running confrontation marked by executions, repression, internet shutdowns and economic pressure.
“The main victims are defenseless Iranian people,” Amini said, adding that many Iranians now feel excluded from decisions that could shape their future.
Discussing the possible domestic impact of any agreement, Amini said economic hardship has overtaken nearly every other public concern inside Iran.
“The issue is no longer simply poverty,” she said. “Many people’s incomes have reached zero or below zero. People are surviving off savings if they have any left.”
Amini said many Iranians who once hoped for stronger international intervention have become increasingly disillusioned.
“Despair is the first thing reflected back from society,” she said. “People feel abandoned.”
Users accuse Trump of inconsistency
Posts circulating on X reflected a broader and often harsher backlash, with many accusing Trump of worsening conditions inside Iran without producing meaningful political change.
One widely shared post listed what the writer described as the results of Trump’s “half-finished war”: internet blackouts, inflation, unemployment, declining incomes, poverty, intensified repression, executions and worsening mental health conditions.
Another user wrote that hearing phrases such as “agreement,” “negotiations” and “we’ll see what happens” now caused disgust after months of uncertainty.
Some posts argued Trump had weakened US credibility by alternating between military threats and diplomacy.
“Trump destroyed the reputation and military credibility of America as a superpower,” one user wrote.
Another accused Washington of trapping “90 million people between sanctions and clerics” after withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear deal only to pursue negotiations again years later.
Several users dismissed the latest reports of possible diplomacy as unrealistic given the scale of disagreements between Washington and Tehran.
One post summarized what it described as Washington’s demands – ending enrichment, dismantling nuclear facilities and transferring enriched uranium abroad – before concluding that the Islamic Republic would never accept such terms.
“If you think these two sides will reach an agreement, then maybe I’m the one who thinks differently,” the post read.
Others suggested the latest reports were intended mainly to stabilize markets and calm fears of renewed conflict.
“The whole Axios story looks like a game to control the markets,” one wrote.
‘Washington balancing pressure, diplomacy’
Amir Hamidi, a national security specialist speaking to Iran International, said Trump’s latest comments appeared aimed at maintaining pressure on Tehran while leaving room for diplomacy.
“Recent remarks by President Trump about giving the Islamic Republic a final opportunity reflect a calculated strategy by the United States,” Hamidi said. “A strategy that preserves maximum pressure while keeping the final diplomatic path open.”
Hamidi said Washington was attempting to present itself as avoiding war while pressuring Tehran politically, economically and diplomatically.
“The message from Washington is clear,” Hamidi said. “There is still a path for negotiations and preventing crisis, but this opportunity cannot be unlimited.”
According to Hamidi, Trump is also seeking to frame the United States as responding to regional instability rather than initiating conflict.
“The United States wants to show that it is not the side starting wars,” he said, adding that Washington’s stated objective remains changing what it sees as destabilizing regional behavior by Tehran.
Netanyahu praised
A large number of posts contrasted Trump with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was often portrayed as more committed to confronting the Islamic Republic militarily.
“Finish the job, Bibi,” several users wrote in English and Persian.
One argued Trump “can never match Bibi,” while another said Israel appeared more determined than Washington to maintain pressure on Tehran.
“The goal of Israel is the destruction of the Islamic Republic,” one post read. “That’s why they stay calm despite America’s mixed signals.”
Some argued any agreement that preserves the current political system in Iran would ultimately fail and damage US deterrence globally.
“If America gives concessions to the Islamic Republic and leaves, then Washington must say goodbye to its deterrence,” one person wrote.
Another argued Tehran would eventually resume efforts toward nuclear weapons capability if it survives the current confrontation intact.
“Immediately after surviving this war, the regime will go toward the atomic bomb,” the user wrote.
Calls for restraint compete with despair
Not all reactions condemned Trump outright. Some users argued Washington’s softer rhetoric may reflect tactical calculations rather than retreat.
“One should not panic or insult Trump for now,” one post said, arguing the administration’s priority appeared to be securing Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium.
Another urged people to avoid emotional swings driven by daily headlines.
“We should not judge too quickly or expect too much,” the user wrote.
