US intel official: Iran regime is marred but intact, will seek to rebuild if it survives

Gabbard tells lawmakers Iran didn’t reconstitute ‘obliterated’ nuclear program after June strikes, contradicting Trump, who cited Tehran’s efforts to do so as a justification for the war

US intelligence agencies assess that while Iran has been severely damaged by the past two and a half weeks of US and Israeli strikes, the regime appears to remain intact and will seek to rebuild its military capabilities if it survives the war, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said on Wednesday.

“The IC [US intelligence community] assesses that the regime in Iran appears to be intact, but largely degraded, due to attacks on its leadership and military capabilities,” Gabbard said in a prepared statement at the beginning of her testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee on the 19th day of the US and Israeli war against Iran.

The testimony featured significant pushback from Democrats who took issue with what they said were conflicting messages from the Trump administration regarding its justification for launching the war against Iran on February 28.

Gabbard appeared before the Senate Intelligence Committee along with several other top intelligence officials as part of an annual hearing on worldwide threats.

The DNI began her testimony by going reviewing the progress that the administration had made in the war against Iran.

Iran’s “conventional military power projection capabilities have largely been destroyed, leaving limited options. Iran’s strategic position has been significantly degraded,” she said, noting that sanctions in the lead-up to the war sparked mass protests against an already weak regime.

“Even if the regime remains intact, the IC assesses that internal tensions are likely to increase as Iran’s economy worsens,” Gabbard continued. “Even so, Iran and its proxies continue to attack us in the Middle East.”

“The IC assesses that if [the] hostile regime survives, it will likely seek to begin a years-long effort to rebuild its military missiles and UAV [Unmanned Aerial Vehicle] forces,” she said.

During the questioning, the committee’s top Democrat Senator Mark Warner pointed out that Gabbard omitted a key line from the written statement that was submitted to the panel beforehand:

“As a result of Operation Midnight Hammer,” Gabbard wrote, referring to the June 2025 US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, “Iran’s nuclear enrichment program was obliterated. There has been no effort to try and rebuild their enrichment capability.”

The conclusion seemed to contradict US President Donald Trump who in his speech announcing Operation Epic Fury, stated that after the 2025 strikes, Iran “attempted to rebuild their nuclear program,” and that this was one of the reasons for the war.

Gabbard told Warner she omitted this section of her written comments when reading the statement aloud because her “time was running long.” But Warner said the senior intelligence official was just reluctant to publicly contradict Trump.

Gabbard was later pressed to defend the White House’s assertion that the Islamic Republic posed an “imminent nuclear threat” in light of her statement that Iran had not tried to rebuild its “obliterated” nuclear program.

She responded that “the intelligence community assessed that Iran maintained the intention to rebuild and to continue to grow their nuclear enrichment.”

Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff challenged Gabbard to explain the discrepancy between Iran merely having the intention to rebuild its nuclear program and posing an imminent threat.

Gabbard replied, “It is not the intelligence community’s responsibility to determine what is and is not an imminent threat.”

“The only person who can determine what is and is not an imminent threat is the president,” she added.

Ossoff called this “false,” arguing that “it is precisely your responsibility to determine what constitutes a threat to the United States.”

Further complicating the question of the intelligence community’s assessments was the resignation on Tuesday of Joseph Kent, who asserted on social media that Iran “posed no imminent threat to our nation.” Kent, who has previously faced scrutiny over his espousal of conspiracy theories and ties to white nationalists, blamed Israel and “its powerful American lobby” for convincing the US to go to war.

Democrats also grilled Gabbard on Trump’s claim that he was completely surprised at Iran’s decision to strike Arab neighbors in response to the US and Israeli attacks.

Gabbard refused to disclose to the committee whether US intelligence assessments had predicted such retaliatory Iranian strikes. She did say that Iran’s closing of the Strait of Hormuz had been expected, yet she refused to say whether she had briefed Trump about this expectation.

Iran’s closure of the crucial strait, through which a fifth of the world’s oil is transported, and its attacks on energy infrastructure in surrounding countries have caused a surge in oil prices and fears of an energy crisis.