Washington: Mounting an expansive defence of US President Donald Trump’s decision to launch a deadly strike on Iran, resulting in the death of its Supreme Leader, Senior Administration officials argued that intelligence on missile threats and nuclear activity left the United States with “no choice”.
“The president decided he was not gonna sit back and allow American forces in the region to absorb attacks from conventional missiles,” said a Senior Administration Official describing the operation “Epic Fury” as pre-emptive and defensive, not retaliatory.
Speaking on conditions of anonymity, officials noted that the immediate concern was Iran’s “conventional missile capability” in the southern belt, alongside its longer-term ambition to acquire nuclear weapons.
According to one official, intelligence indicated Iran could use those missiles “potentially preemptively”. Waiting to be struck first would have led to “substantially higher” casualties and damage, the official observed.
“We are not gonna be held hostage by them, and we are not gonna let them hit us first,” another Senior Administration Official said.
Officials accused Iran of striking civilian infrastructure in response. “They have now struck multiple civilian sites unrelated to military sites. They have hit a hotel… they’ve hit the airport in Kuwait, they’ve hit hotels in Abu Dhabi,” one official said.
The administration said the strikes were also driven by what it described as Iran’s systematic rebuilding of nuclear facilities damaged in “Operation Midnight Hammer”.
Intelligence, officials said, showed Tehran was reconstructing enrichment and conversion sites and expanding centrifuge manufacturing capacity.
Iran had developed the ability to build advanced “IR six centrifuges”, described as “the fastest ones out there”. These machines significantly accelerate enrichment.
Officials pointed to enrichment levels and stockpiles.
Roughly “450 kilograms of 60 per cent material” would be “only one week away from getting to 90 per cent weapons rate”, the Senior Administration Official asserted.
They also raised concerns about the Tehran Research Reactor.
“Never once did they use any of the fissionable material there to make even a single medicine,” the Senior Administration Official said, referring to intelligence obtained from the IEAE.
Officials said enrichment at 20 per cent and 60 per cent levels dramatically shortened the pathway to weapons-grade material.
“These are all violations,” one official said, adding that for “every one of the three violations” cited, “we’ve got five more”.
Diplomacy, officials argued, had failed.
President Trump sought what officials described as “a real deal” that would ensure Iran would “never have the ability to possess a nuclear weapon”.
Negotiators offered strict guardrails and even “free nuclear fuel forever” if Iran abandoned enrichment.
“They basically said that didn’t work for them. They needed to enrich uranium,” the Senior Administration Official said, calling that refusal “a big tell”.
Another official said Iran consistently refused to address ballistic missiles.
“They will not even talk about it,” the official said.
Officials also cited Tehran’s unwillingness to address proxy groups that, in their words, have caused “chaos and destruction and instability in the region”.
The negotiation process, officials said, was marked by “games, tricks, stall tactics”.
“We could have made another short-term bad deal,” a Senior Administration Official said. “It wouldn’t have dealt with the long-term issue of Iran.”
With missile capabilities, enrichment thresholds and proxy networks now at the centre of the confrontation, officials made clear that Washington is signalling a harder line — rejecting what they described as incremental or temporary fixes.
The administration’s message was blunt: the choice, in its view, was between acting now or facing a more dangerous confrontation later.
(IANS)
