The B-2 bombers have returned to their US base, but questions about the success of their airstrikes last weekend hang in the air.

President Donald Trump is pushing back hard against a leaked preliminary intelligence report, suggesting the audacious bombing raid only set Iran’s nuclear ambition back “by months”.

“It’s destroyed… Iran will not have nuclear. We blew it up. It’s blown to kingdom come,” Mr Trump told a news conference.

Read more: Iran and NATO summit latest updates

A statement from CIA director John Ratcliffe backed that up. He said: “[The] CIA can confirm that a body of credible intelligence indicates Iran’s nuclear programme has been severely damaged by the recent, targeted strikes.

“This includes new intelligence from a historically reliable and accurate source/method that several key Iranian nuclear facilities were destroyed and would have to be rebuilt over the course of years.”

But Democrats say the president was claiming Iran‘s underground facilities had been “obliterated” long before any intelligence had been received.

Arizona senator Mark Kelly, who flew 39 combat missions in the first Gulf War, said: “He’s just saying that because he wants that to be the narrative.

“He said it the night of the strike, without any information, not even satellite imagery, and certainly without any information about what happened underneath 200 feet of rock and granite and dirt.”

“The likelihood of something underground like that being obliterated is incredibly low,” he added.

Senator Kelly blamed Mr Trump for Iran’s enrichment growing from “less than 4% to, public reporting, 60%”, accusing him of “chucking the Obama deal out the window”.

The leaking of the classified report from the Pentagon and subsequent debate has enraged US defence secretary Pete Hegseth.

Read more:
How much damage has been done to Iran’s nuclear facilities?
Why did the US attack on Iran avoid some nuclear sites?

“If you want to make an assessment of what happened at Fordow [nuclear site], you better get a big shovel and go really deep because Iran’s nuclear programme is obliterated,” Mr Hegseth said.

“Those that dropped the bombs precisely in the right place know exactly what happened when they exploded, and you know who else knows? Iran.”

The White House is railing against what it calls the “fake news media” for reporting the content of the leaked report.

But the success of a military operation has become a battle of political narratives in Congress.

That will last longer than a 12-day war because the truth lies buried, quite literally, deep underground.

The head of the CIA has said a “body of credible intelligence” indicates that Iran’s nuclear programme was “severely damaged” by a US operation last weekend.

Director John Ratcliffe revealed that information from a “historically reliable and accurate source” suggests several key sites were destroyed – and will take years to rebuild.

This contrasts with a recently leaked report from the US Defence Intelligence Agency that cast doubt on the effectiveness of Operation Midnight Hammer.

An assessment obtained by several media outlets concluded that bombing of three nuclear facilities might only have set back Iran’s capabilities by a few months.

Follow the latest developments

Donald Trump has refuted this leak in the strongest possible terms – describing it as “fake news” and insisting the military’s targets were “totally obliterated”.

He added: “This was a devastating attack, and it knocked them for a loop.”

The US president went on to reveal that defence secretary Pete Hegseth will be holding a “major news conference” later today that will be “interesting and irrefutable”.

On Truth Social, he claimed that the “Great American Pilots” involved in the operation were “very upset” by the leaked report.

“After 36 hours of dangerously flying through Enemy Territory, they landed, they knew the Success was LEGENDARY, and then, two days later, they started reading Fake News by CNN and The Failing New York Times,” he wrote.

The White House has highlighted an Israeli statement that suggested Tehran’s nuclear efforts have now been delayed for a few years, with Iran’s foreign ministry also confirming the facilities have suffered significant damage.

But drawing reliable conclusions about the impact of the bunker buster bombs remains difficult – especially only days after they took place.

Jeffrey Lewis, a professor of non-proliferation at the Middlebury Institute, said: “If it’s too early to know, why is Trump saying it’s obliterated? Either it’s too early to know, or you know.”

Read more:
NATO chief refers to Trump as ‘daddy’
Why did US attack avoid some nuclear sites?
Mapping the strikes in Israel and Iran

In other developments, Mr Trump has confirmed the US will be holding talks with Iran next week.

However, he said he doesn’t think an agreement to curtail its nuclear programme is needed, because Iran’s facilities are now too badly damaged.

“They’re not going to be doing it anyway. They’ve had it,” he claimed.

A fragile ceasefire between Israel and Iran has held for a second day – with the skies over major cities quiet overnight.

The president joined fellow world leaders at a NATO summit in The Hague yesterday, where members agreed to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP.

Donald Trump and his NATO allies confirmed their “ironclad commitment” to collective defence in a communique released at the end of a brief summit in The Hague.

But there was no condemnation of Russia’s war in Ukraine – something that had been in previous statements by allied leaders when Joe Biden was in the White House. His successor has a closer relationship with Vladimir Putin than many of his allies.

The document did describe Russia as a “long-term threat”.

But there was also no word about NATO membership for Ukraine – something that had previously been described an “irreversible path”.

The allies also agreed to spend more on their collective defence.

Middle East latest: Trump rejects US intel on nuclear sites

The endorsement of Article 5 of NATO’s founding treaty came after the US commander-in-chief – the most powerful leader in the room – suggested on his way to the gathering that his definition of what it means may differ from other allies.

The US president’s words risked undermining the credibility of a commitment that has helped ensure the security of NATO for more than 75 years, though the joint statement, approved by the leaders of all 32 member states spelt out clearly what Article 5 constitutes.

“We reaffirm our ironclad commitment to collective defence as enshrined in Article 5 of the Washington Treaty – that an attack on one is an attack on all,” it said.

“We remain united and steadfast in our resolve to protect our one billion citizens, defend the Alliance, and safeguard our freedom and democracy.”

Sir Keir Starmer and the leaders of all European member states, as well as Canada, are all too aware of Mr Trump’s scepticism about NATO.

He has accused his allies of taking advantage of the US’s far more powerful armed forces to defend Europe and wants the rest of the alliance to take on more of the burden.

Read more:
How NATO’s Article 5 clause works
UK to buy nuclear-carrying fighter jets
Doubt cast over success of ‘Operation Midnight Hammer’

Urgently needing to keep him onside, Mark Rutte, the head of NATO, has been rallying member states to agree to a new pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defence and related areas – a level first touted by Mr Trump.

The statement commits allies to hit this goal by 2035, though Spain has already come out to warn it will agree to the new target but without having a plan to reach it.

The communique reads: “United in the face of profound security threats and challenges, in particular the long term threat posed by Russia to Euro-Atlantic security and the persistent threat of terrorism, allies commit to invest 5% of GDP annually on core defence requirements as well as defence-and security-related spending by 2035.”

It is a significant rise, that is broken down into 3.5% of GDP on core defence – up from a previous goal of 2% – and a further 1.5% to be invested in national resilience, such as roads, railways, energy and cyber security.

The final communique was much shorter than usual, comprising just five paragraphs.

In the only mention of Russia’s war in Ukraine, it said: “Allies reaffirm their enduring sovereign commitments to provide support to Ukraine, whose security contributes to ours, and, to this end, will include direct contributions towards Ukraine’s defence and its defence industry when calculating allies’ defence spending.”

Mr Trump has vowed to end Russia’s war in Ukraine but has so far failed to stop the fighting.