There is a critical question hanging over the events of the past few days.
Behind the chest-thumping from Donald Trump, and the bewilderment beyond at his statecraft-by-social-media, doubts have now reached fever pitch about the success of the American bombing of Iran’s nuclear sites.
“We were assuming that the damage was going to be much more significant than this assessment is finding,” said one of three sources, speaking to NBC News.
“This assessment is already finding that these core pieces are still intact. That’s a bad sign for the overall programme.”
NBC News has spoken to three sources – all of whom say that the initial assessment by the Defence Intelligence Agency has concluded that the US airstrikes were not as effective as Mr Trump claimed.
Similar leaks were made to The New York Times, The Washington Post and CNN.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:04
Why did Trump lash out at Iran and Israel?
Responding to the CNN leak, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said: “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community.”
She continued: “The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear programme. Everyone knows what happens when you drop 14 30,000lb bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”
In his address to the nation on Saturday night, Mr Trump had said: “I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:34
Trump: Iran strikes ‘spectacular success’
US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has also dismissed the leaks, saying: “Based on everything we have seen – and I’ve seen it all – our bombing campaign obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons.
“Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target – and worked perfectly.”
“The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran, so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the president and the successful mission.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:03
Iran’s nuclear capabilities
Battle Damage Assessments (BDAs) take a long time to be close to conclusive and require extensive intelligence analysis.
Speaking to Sky News, former director of the CIA and top US General David Petraeus cautioned about drawing any conclusions at this stage.
“Well, the truth is, it is just too soon. And those who are leaking should know that it takes a long time to do the battle damage assessment. And those who have actually pushed back in very conclusive ways also probably should have wait for the full results,” Gen Petraeus said.
“This is a very painstaking process. It’s an effort by the overall intelligence community, not just Defence Intelligence Agency. In fact, the CIA would be the lead in this effort to mine all sources of intelligence, imagery, intelligence of all types, signals, cyber, even open-source intelligence.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:29
Trump’s ‘ripping up the rule book’
Beyond the debate over the extent of the damage, questions remain over whether Iran might have managed to move equipment including centrifuges. Critically too, the whereabouts of about 400kg of highly enriched uranium is unknown.
The classified assessment of the military’s operation in Iran has been transmitted to Congress and has been viewed by some senators in a secure location, according to two sources with direct knowledge of the situation.
“I’ve reviewed the classified material,” Democratic Party Senator Tim Kaine, a member of the Armed Services Committee, said.
“I’m a little bit disappointed that my colleagues went and looked at it and mainly started talking about it publicly. That’s not we’re supposed to do with a classified report,” he added.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
7:58
Iran ‘not at all’ thankful for Trump
Speaking on Sunday to NBC’s Meet The Press, Israel’s ambassador to the UN Danny Danon insisted Iran’s nuclear capability had been dramatically set back.
“I think it’s still very early to jump into conclusions. We have to wait for the assessment. I can tell you one thing for sure. If you look where Iran was 12 days ago and where they are today, you understand that both Israel and the US were able to degrade the capabilities, push them back decades, and if we had an imminent threat, it doesn’t exist anymore.”
There are developments in the quest for peace in Ukraine.
It’s been one of those days when different snippets of news have come together to create a picture of sorts. The jigsaw remains complicated, but the suggestion is neither the Ukrainiansnor the Europeans have been privy to the developments.
The most intriguing development came at lunchtime on Thursday.
“He must have got this from K…” wrote Donald Trump‘s special envoy Steve Witkoff on X. He clearly thought he was sending a private message.
He was replying to a scoop of a story by Axios’s Barak Ravid.
Image: Steve Witkoff, Trump’s envoy for the Middle East and trusted Ukraine peace plan man. Pic: Reuters
The story revealed a “secret” plan to end the Ukrainewar. The report suggested the Americans had been talking secretly to the Russians about a renewed effort to bring the war to an end, which involved Ukraine ceding land it still controls to Russia.
Who is “K” in Witkoff’s message? It’s probably Kirill Dmitriev, who has become Putin’s unofficial and unlikely envoy to Washington. Kyiv-born and Stanford-educated Dmitriev is, essentially, Witkoff’s Russian opposite number.
In a sense, they are the yin and yang of this geopolitical puzzle. Witkoff is a real estate mogul. Dmitriev is an economist. They are opposing forces with backgrounds that are, on the face of it, equally unsuited to geopolitical conflict resolution. Yet their two leaders are trusting them with this huge task.
Image: Kirill Dmitriev was in Alaska for the Trump-Putin summit earlier this year. Pic: Reuters
‘Territorial concessions’ in 28-point plan
So, back to the developments to have emerged over the last 24 hours.
First, we know senior US Department of War officials, including Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, have arrived in the Ukrainian capital to meet their counterparts there.
Their visit was scheduled but the focus shifted. The plan to discuss drone technology and the winter offensive morphed into a discussion about a Russian-presented peace plan Witkoff and Dmitriev had been discussing.
Image: Rescue workers clear rubble after a Russian strike on Ternopil, Ukraine. Pic: AP
This is the second development. The Axios report – which Witkoff seems inadvertently to have suggested came from Dmitriev – claims the two envoys met recently in Florida (Witkoff’s base) to discuss a 28-point plan for peace.
A defence official told our partners at NBC News that Driscoll has been briefed on the 28-point plan. Driscoll and his military staff are thought to have been presenting an initial brief to the Ukrainian side of this Russian-sponsored plan.
Ukrainian sources have suggested to me in clear terms they are not happy with this Witkoff-Dmitriev plan. Sources tell me it includes “territorial concessions” and “reductions in military strength”. The Ukrainian position is the plan represents the latest attempt to “play the American government”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:50
Death toll rises after Russian strikes
What’s happening with security guarantees?
Ukraine wants security guarantees from the US. Trump signalled during Zelenskyy’s last visit to Washington that he was willing to provide those. This was framed by the Europeans as a huge positive development, even though the White House did not spell out the crucial detail – what would these guarantees actually entail?
The latest reporting, from Axios, suggests the security guarantees (still undefined, publicly at least) are dependent on Ukraine giving up the whole of the Donbas region – this would include about 15% of territory Russia does not currently hold.
Crucially, the areas of the Donbas from which Ukraine would withdraw (the 15%) would be considered a demilitarised zone. The plan is very similar to one floated by Vice President JD Vance in the months before Trump won last year’s election, which was roundly rejected as a non-starter at the time.
Another source, from a third country close to the negotiations, has told me the Qataris are playing a role in the talks and were present at the weekend when Steve Witkoff met Ukraine’s national security advisor Rustem Umerov last weekend.
Qatari and Turkish mediation, along with the multipoint peace plan for Gaza, is being projected as a model transferable to Ukraine despite the conflict, challenges, and root causes being wholly different.
Other European sources told me this morning they were not aware of this Russian-American plan. It’s worth remembering it’s in the interests of the Russians to be seen to be engaged in peace proposals in order to avoid secondary sanctions from the US.
Zelenskyy has been in Turkey over the past 24 hours, where he singled out Trump’s efforts to find peace.
Image: Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Recep Tayyip Erdogan at a press conference in Ankara. Pic: AP
“Since the beginning of this year, we in Ukraine have supported every decisive step and the leadership of @POTUS, every strong and fair proposal aimed at ending this war.” Zelenskyy wrote. “And only President Trump and the United States have sufficient power to make this war come to an end.”
The letter sent by the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform said members wanted to talk to him because of the widely reported allegations that have been made against him, which he denies, and because of his relationship with Epstein and what he may have seen.
The committee is looking into Epstein’s crimes and his wider sex trafficking network. Andrew was given until today, 20 November, to respond.
Legally he isn’t obliged to talk to them, and to be honest it’s hard to imagine why he would.
The only time he has spoken at length about the allegations against him and his relationship with Epstein was that Newsnight interview in 2019, and we all know how much of a disaster that was.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:35
Releasing the Epstein files: How we got here
Yes, this could be an opportunity for him to publicly apologise for keeping up his links with Epstein, which he has never done before, or show some sympathy towards Epstein’s victims, even as he vehemently denies the allegations against him.
But while there is the moral argument that he should tell the committee everything he knows, it could also raise more uncomfortable questions for him, and that could feel like too much of a risk for Andrew and the wider Royal Family.
However, even saying no won’t draw all this to a close. There are other outstanding loose ends.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
13:31
The new Epstein files: The key takeaways
There could also still be a debate in parliament about the Andrew problem.
The Liberal Democrats have said they want to use their opposition debating time to bring the issue to the floor of the House of Commons, while other MPs on the Public Accounts Committee have signalled their intention to look into Andrew’s finances and housing arrangements.
And then there are the wider Epstein files over in America, and what information they may hold.
From developments this week, it seems we are edging ever closer to seeing those released.
All of this may mean Andrew in other ways is forced to say more than he wants to, even without opening up to the Congress committee.
Donald Trump has signed a bill approving the release of files relating to Jeffrey Epstein by the US Justice Department.
“I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!” he said in a Truth Social post, following a lengthy preamble aimed at discrediting the Democrats.
“Democrats have used the ‘Epstein’ issue, which affects them far more than the Republican Party, in order to try and distract from our AMAZING Victories,” he continued.
Image: Donald Trump speaking in Washington earlier on Wednesday. Pic: Reuters
The Justice Department now has 30 days to release the documents it holds on the paedophile financier.
WHAT DOES THE BILL SAY MUST BE RELEASED?
All files relating to Epstein, including investigations, prosecutions, or custodial matters;
All files relating to Ghislaine Maxwell;
Flight logs or travel records for any aircraft, vessel, or vehicle owned, operated, or used by Epstein or any related entity;
Individuals named or referenced in connection with Epstein’s criminal activities, civil settlements, immunity or plea agreements, or investigations;
Entities with known or alleged ties to Epstein’s trafficking or financial networks;
Any immunity deals, non-prosecution agreements, plea bargains, or sealed settlements involving Epstein or his associates;
Internal DOJ communications concerning decisions to charge, not charge, investigate, or decline to investigate Epstein or his associates;
All communications concerning the destruction, deletion, alteration, misplacement, or concealment of files related to Epstein;
Documentation of Epstein’s detention or death, including witness interviews and autopsy reports.
How did we get here?
Mr Trump promised during last year’s election campaign to release the Epstein files in full, but has since spent months decrying them as a Democratic “hoax”.
His links to the Epstein have long been subject to scrutiny. Mr Trump has always denied any wrongdoing.
“Because of this request, the votes were almost unanimous in favor [sic] of passage,” Mr Trump wrote in his late-night post announcing the signing of the bill.
The House of Representatives was indeed near unanimous in voting for the material to be released, with 427 in favour and one against.
Hot on the heels of that vote, which was met with cheers in the chamber, the Senate said it too would pass the bill.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:35
House passes bill to release all Epstein files
Trump tries to tie Democrats to Epstein
Mr Trump’s post repeatedly labels Epstein as a Democrat, citing his past associations with the likes of Bill Clinton.
Emails, photos and other documents released by Congress in recent weeks have included references to Mr Trump, the UK’s since sacked US ambassador Lord Mandelson, and former British prince Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, who has faced calls from members of the committee to give evidence.
Like Mr Trump, both Britons have denied any wrongdoing and expressed regret about their relationship with Epstein.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:23
What’s at stake for Andrew at US Congress committee?
Unrest in MAGA world
The issue has proved to be a major source of division within Mr Trump’s Make America Great Again movement.
Marjorie Taylor Greene, a long-time Trump backer who publicly fell out with the president just days ago, stood with Epstein survivors on the steps of the Capitol ahead of Tuesday’s Congress votes.
She said: “These women have fought the most horrific fight that no woman should have to fight. And they did it by banding together and never giving up.”