By Muhammad Mamman
United States intelligence assessments have contradicted key claims used by President Donald Trump to justify military action against Iran, concluding that Tehran is not actively rebuilding its nuclear programme.
Testifying before lawmakers, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said recent assessments show Iran’s nuclear capabilities were significantly degraded following US strikes and that there is no evidence of renewed enrichment activity. 
The findings cast doubt on the administration’s repeated assertions that Iran posed an “imminent nuclear threat” — a central justification for the ongoing conflict. 
Gabbard stopped short of directly contradicting the president, saying determinations of “imminent threat” ultimately rest with the White House. However, her testimony has intensified scrutiny over whether intelligence was overstated or selectively interpreted to support the war effort. 
The intelligence community’s position appears to diverge from Trump’s public stance, with the president previously insisting Iran was close to developing a nuclear weapon — claims he has maintained despite internal assessments to the contrary.
Lawmakers, particularly Democrats, have raised concerns over transparency and accountability, accusing officials of withholding or downplaying intelligence that could undermine the administration’s case for war. 
The controversy has also exposed divisions within the US security establishment, as some officials warn that while Iran’s nuclear infrastructure has been severely damaged, the broader threat landscape in the region remains volatile.
As political pressure mounts in Washington, the debate over the intelligence behind the war continues to shape both domestic opinion and the future direction of US policy in the Middle East.
