Iran and the Bomb: Separating Threat from Theater
How fear and fiction are fueling political agendas at home
Last week, I explained why Americans didn’t need to panic about Iran. That message still holds. But the headlines remain speculative and potentially dangerous. So today, I want to offer a follow-up: What does this mean for the US at this moment in time? I argue that this type of distraction is in line with what authoritarian-leaning regimes, like Trump’s, take advantage of to enable their own agenda.
As someone who has worked for 30 years in nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament, I’ll walk through what is likely going on, what to watch for and how to handle any new information coming at us—with receipts. You’ll find a list of references at the end.
Who Benefits from Your Fear?
Recap [Skip ahead if you're up to speed]
On 21 June, the US launched Operation Midnight Hammer, targeting three of Iran’s key nuclear sites: Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan. The aim was to neutralize Tehran’s ability to build a nuclear weapon. The mission deployed seven B-2 stealth aircraft and a guided missile submarine and marked the first use ever of the 30,000-pound GBU-57 “bunker busting” bomb (14 dropped on the Fordo facility and other sites.)[1]
Prior to the bombing, Iran had about 880 pounds (400 kg) of highly enriched uranium (HEU), enough for 10-12 nuclear warheads, but with no evidence of actual weaponization. At the beginning of the so-called “12 days war,” Israel carried out a series of raids and bombings, claiming it killed around 30 Iranian commanders and 11 nuclear scientists. They contend they also hit eight nuclear-related facilities and more than 720 military infrastructure sites. More than 1,000 people were killed, including at least 417 civilians.[2]
Initially, President Trump claimed that they had completely “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear facilities with the bunker buster bombs. However, early reports from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), and later backed up by various international analysts, the truth was that only some infrastructure had been damaged. News agencies reported that their nuclear program was delayed only by months, not years.
Among the resources hit were missile assets. Even before the 12 days of chaos, Iran’s missiles only had the range to hit targets 1250 miles from Tehran, roughly the distance to Eastern Europe. The US and other intelligence agencies, apart from Israel, have never assessed them as an imminent threat.
Yet, the media and some officials continue to fuel fear and sensationalize the issue.
The US Response: Illegal, Unchecked, and Underreported
The US conducted strikes:
Without UN approval (required under the UN Charter),
Without Congressional debate or authorization (required under US law),
Without clear evidence of an imminent threat (the only legal justification under international law for a first strike).
There’s been almost zero mainstream discussion about that fact. Why?
Because American exceptionalism has quietly replaced legal obligation. The White House sees itself as a sole superpower acting under its own authority. It mistakenly believes that the world will follow as it has done in the past. They do not realize that the reason US leadership has been so effective is because it has led by example.
Imagine if another country bombed civilian infrastructure in a nuclear state without provocation. We’d call it an act of war. But when the US does it, the Administration calls it “leadership.”
“One path leads to a wider war, deeper human suffering and serious damage to the international order. The other leads to de-escalation, diplomacy and dialogue.”
– António Guterres, UN Secretary-General
Let me be clear: I’ve worked on international humanitarian law, arms control, and human rights for decades. The only nations that act with such impunity are those with nothing to lose (North Korea) or those with no clue (Trump Administration.) As a one-off, the US might get away with minimal damage to its credibility, especially as other countries are secretly grateful Iran’s program has been damaged. But continued disregard for international, or even domestic, law will have long-term, negative consequences for the country and its reputation, and its ability to effect change externally.
So…is Iran’s nuclear program still intact?
The short answer: partially. Iran’s strategy is to be ambiguous regarding its intentions—it retains enough capacity to deter aggression, but not enough proof of malign intent to provoke. This is on purpose. As discussed in the previous article, the threat of a nuclear bomb is more effective than its actual use (read: deterrence.) Launching a nuke = suicide mission. No actor would be able to survive retaliation in kind.
Do they still have the nuclear material?
YES.
It is widely believed that Iran was able to move the 880lbs of HEU out before the US strike. It would be easy to do—imagine four 220 lb. men in a pickup truck, or just the contents of two scuba tanks.[3] We can, and should, assume that they still have access to this material. Trump’s claim that they “couldn’t move it” is demonstrably false.
Do they still have missile capability and infrastructure?
SOME.
There is no question that Iran’s scientific and industrial base was damaged. Netanyahu’s earlier efforts (i.e. assassinations, sabotage) paved the way for the US strikes. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) described damage to Fordo as “very, very, very considerable.” The DIA report says Iran’s enrichment centrifuges are largely intact, although many tunnels have collapsed.
Do they have the intent to create and use a nuclear weapon?
No — not currently.
While they are now denying entry to IAEA watchdog inspectors, they remain members of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and, importantly, its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement. They have also signaled a desire to continue diplomatic talks, which is an indication that they see their path, at least for now, as one of a negotiated settlement rather than escalation.
Israel has the bomb??
Not included in my last article, but mentioned in my interview on Meidas Touch Network/Valor Media on 25 June, is that Israel is also a nuclear-armed state. It has at least 90 plutonium-based nuclear warheads and enough plutonium for 100-200 more weapons.[4] They are one of only 5 countries in the world not a member of the NPT. Israel is believed to have begun a nuclear weapons program soon after 1948 which ran until the 1960s. They, like Iran, prefer to keep information about this murky and maintain they will not be the first to “introduce”[5] nukes into the region. Israel’s posture is an important point to consider when we discuss the asymmetry of stockpiles: Iran’s potential 10-12 warheads v. Israel’s 90+ (and 5,277 of the US).
What’s next?
In many ways, we are right back to square one; almost exactly where we stood before Trump tore up the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) forged under the Obama administration. It included:
Intrusive inspections,
Verified material tracking,
Broad international support.
Trump’s unilateral withdrawal in 2018 gutted the JCPOA’s effectiveness and set the stage for today’s crisis.
Now, with new diplomatic efforts underway, including quiet backchannel talks in Oman, there is hope for a reset. But only if we see through the fear tactics.
The REAL Danger: Fear as a Political Weapon
A tactic is as old as time.
Authoritarian-leaning leaders losing public trust often use foreign threats to:
Distract citizens from domestic failures,
Unify the population around a single cause, and
Leverage that cohesion to silence dissent.
This was the hope of Donald Trump when contemplating the Iran attack, despite his “America first” slogan and pledge to keep the US out of new wars.
Examples of authoritarian distraction
📛 Germany – Hitler capitalized on the population’s fear of Communism and the assumed threats of the Soviet Union, as well as the national humiliation following Germany’s defeat in World War I. He painted Jews and Communists as enemies of the state, which allowed him to consolidate power and stoke nationalistic fervor. The invasion of Poland provided Hitler with an external enemy around which to unite the German population. He limited freedoms and justified the repression of domestic opposition under the pretext of wartime necessity.
📛 Soviet Union – Throughout the 1930s, Stalin used the fear of capitalist encirclement to justify brutal purges and repression. The threat of foreign invasion, often exaggerated or fabricated, served to unify the population against a common enemy and solidified Stalin’s totalitarian rule. This narrative allowed him to silence dissent, including the execution and imprisonment of so-called enemies, many of whom he falsely accused of colluding with foreign powers.
📛 Argentina – In 1982, the military junta under General Leopoldo Galtieri used the Falklands War as a way to divert attention from the country’s dire economic situation and widespread domestic unrest, and to justify its continuation of authoritarian rule. He launched an invasion of the Falkland Islands claiming the islands as Argentine territory, not British. The short war, despite its failure, rallied nationalist sentiment and allowed the junta to present itself as defenders of Argentine sovereignty, which temporarily unified the country under the banner of national pride.
📛 North Korea – The Kim dynasty has consistently used external threats to justify its authoritarian rule and suppress domestic dissent. In this climate, the Kim regime has been able to solidify its grip on power, justify its militaristic policies, and keep the population in a constant state of fear. The regime’s frequent nuclear and missile tests are part of this strategy, positioning North Korea as both a target of foreign aggression and a necessary protector of its citizens.
Trump following in dictator footsteps
📛 US 2025 – Under the Trump Administration, fear is being used to weaponize public opinion and marginalize accountability. For example, the President stated that Iran’s nuclear capability had been “obliterated” and that anyone who disagreed with him was spouting fake news.
Donald Trump has effectively used the tactic of invoking external threats to bolster his political power and distract from domestic issues. He has repeatedly portrayed foreign adversaries, particularly China and Iran, as imminent threats to the American way of life, which has allowed him to rally his base around nationalism and the need for strong leadership. These threats justify aggressive policies such as harsh tariffs, military posturing, and even the building of a border wall; all while deflecting attention from pressing domestic problems like cratering polls, tax breaks for billionaires, healthcare cuts, Constitutional crises and dismantling of democratic infrastructure. This narrative empowers him to silence or delegitimize domestic opposition, framing it as undermining the country’s security.
This isn’t leadership. It’s misdirection.
WHAT YOU CAN DO
Here’s what I suggest as someone who’s seen this play out in fragile democracies around the world:
On Iran -
➤ Follow independent nuclear and geopolitical analysts. (See my recommendations below.)
➤ Know the difference between deterrence and actual preparation for war.
➤ Trust nuclear and military experts, not political pundits or cable news panels. Politicians weighing in should be questioned as to their real expertise on this issue; much is just opinion or spin.
Generally -
➤ Stay grounded, informed and calm.
➤ Speak up — to your friends, family, neighbors, media, and especially elected officials
➤ Find credible sources of information to decide for yourself if any threat is real.
➤ Insist on accountability and truth, not manufactured crisis.
➤ Ask yourself: who benefits from panic? Follow the political incentives.
➤ Don’t let anyone tell you that criticism of policy is “unpatriotic.”
➤ Share this article to push back on fear narratives.
➤ Subscribe to this newsletter, where I separate out fact from fiction, or opinion.
We’ve seen this tactic before — in fragile democracies around the world. And I’m telling you now: the greatest threat to American democracy isn’t Iran. It’s authoritarianism at home.
WHAT TO WATCH FOR
Watch for an upcoming series entitled, CSL Global Dispatch. It will link international events and lessons to what is going on in America today. Why reinvent the wheel?
Also coming soon – Civic Solutions Lab Podcast – which will bring international and expert perspectives to current political debate in the US.
REFERENCES
UN experts condemn US attack on Iran and demand permanent end to hostilities, 26 June 2025
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/06/un-experts-condemn-united-states-attack-iran-and-demand-permanent-end
USA: UN expert warns of interference in legal and judicial system, 4 June 2025
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/06/usa-un-expert-warns-interference-legal-and-judicial-system
Uproar Over Leaked Intelligence Underlines Murky View of Iran Strikes, 26 June 2025
https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/uproar-over-leaked-intelligence-underlines-murky-view-of-iran-strikes-7f239b0a
IAEA chief says Iran could be enriching uranium within months, 29 June 2025
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iaea-chief-says-iran-could-be-enriching-uranium-within-months-2025-06-29/
Israel killed 30 Iranian security chiefs and 11 nuclear scientists, Israeli official says, 27 June 2025
https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/israel-killed-30-iranian-security-chiefs-11-nuclear-scientists-israeli-official-2025-06-27/
New U.S. intelligence report suggests Iran’s nuclear program only set back by months after strikes, 24 Jun 2025
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/new-u-s-intelligence-report-suggests-irans-nuclear-program-only-set-back-by-months-after-strikes
As Israel Targets Iran’s Nuclear Program, It Has a Secret One of Its Own,
17 June 2015
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/17/world/middleeast/israel-nuclear-weapons.html
Iran’s supreme leader makes first public appearance since Iran-Israel war started, 5 July 2025
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/07/05/iran-israel-00440032
Hundreds of thousands mourn top Iranian military commanders and scientists killed in Israeli strikes, 28 June 2025
https://apnews.com/article/israel-iran-war-nuclear-06-28-2025-f53ad5751d7427deab42111e1ca7751d
US strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites ‘marks perilous turn’: Diplomacy must prevail, says Guterres, 22 June 2025
https://news.un.org/en/story/2025/06/1164756
Trump claims Iran’s nuclear program has been ‘obliterated.’ Senate Republicans aren’t entirely convinced, 26 June 2025
https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/26/senate-iran-intelligence-briefing-00428638
===========================================
RECOMMENDED RELIABLE SOURCES
reuters.com (just on Iran: reuters.com/world/iran/)
bbc.com/news (just on Iran: bbc.com/news/topics/cjnwl8q4ggwt)
iaea.org (UN)
ohchr.org (UN)
npr.org/sections/news/
pbs.org/newshour
nytimes.com
politico.com
wsj.com
cnn.com
economist.com
washingtonpost.com
axios.com
apnews.com
news.com.au
theguardian.com/us
theatlantic.com
brennancenter.org (Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law)
armscontrolcenter.org (Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation)
icanw.org/nuclear_arsenals (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons)
armscontrol.org (Arms Control Association)
[1] https://www.politico.com/news/2025/06/26/senate-iran-intelligence-briefing-00428638jkjkj
[2] https://apnews.com/article/israel-iran-war-nuclear-06-28-2025-f53ad5751d7427deab42111e1ca7751d
[3] Calculated with the help of an LLM, so it could be a bit off.
[4] https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-israels-nuclear-arsenal/
[5] This is another term that they like to keep ambiguous. It comes from a promise they made to a US president.
Excellent article! Your experience alone was enough of a resource for me, but I appreciate all the other resources listed as well!