TEHRAN – The former U.S. National Security Adviser has admitted that the Trump administration’s decision to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities was unnecessary and counterproductive, especially at a time when Tehran was ready to accept a long-term diplomatic deal.

Speaking on Friday at the Aspen Security Forum, Jake Sullivan said the Trump administration could have avoided military action altogether. He claimed that Iran was ready to “agree to a very good deal that could have restrained its nuclear program for decades—not just a few years.”

Sullivan emphasized that diplomacy remains the only path to permanently resolving the Iranian nuclear issue. “In my view, that’s the direction Trump should have taken—and I believe he still might—because diplomacy is the only viable way to achieve a lasting end to the Iranian nuclear threat.”

In earlier remarks to CNN, Sullivan had revealed that his initial response to Trump’s military decision was to question its long-term consequences. “My first reaction was the classic foreign policy question: what happens next? Even if American pilots had carried out the strikes successfully, we would still be left needing a deal. Iran still possesses enriched uranium stockpiles and centrifuge capacity, even if some of the installed centrifuges were damaged or destroyed—which, frankly, no one can confirm. They still have the technical capability to rebuild.”

He further added that Iran had at that point already barred International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors from accessing the targeted sites. “So, we lost the kind of verification and oversight we once had under a nuclear agreement,” he said

According to the Jewish Insider, several Democratic senators at the Aspen forum also criticized Trump for launching the strikes without consulting Congress and reiterated the need to resume serious negotiations with Tehran.

These remarks align with the preliminary assessment by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), which suggests that the strikes failed to cripple Iran’s core nuclear infrastructure, contradicting the U.S. President Trump’s claims of “total obliteration.” According to CNN, Iran’s enriched uranium stockpiles remain intact, and damage to centrifuges at key sites such as Fordow and Natanz was minimal.

While U.S. officials attempted to spin the outcome as a victory, the leaked intelligence paints a different picture. “At most, the U.S. set them back a few months,” one American intelligence source familiar with the report told CNN.

In a statement attempting to counter the criticism, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt accused the media of trying to discredit both President Trump and the fighter pilots who “perfectly executed” the mission. 

Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear weapons expert at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, told CNN that satellite imagery confirms Iran’s nuclear infrastructure is largely intact. He said key underground facilities in Natanz, Isfahan, and Parchin remain functional and could be used to rapidly restore Iran’s enrichment capabilities.

The U.S. assault, which happened on June 22, provoked a forceful Iranian response. Less than 48 hours later, Iran launched a barrage of missiles targeting the U.S.-operated Al-Udeid base in Qatar, resulting in significant damage and prompting Washington to seek a ceasefire.

Despite the deployment of U.S. B-2 bombers and precision-guided munitions aimed at three major sites—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan—the strikes primarily damaged aboveground infrastructure, including power systems and facilities involved in uranium metal conversion, American media claims. 

Iran has said damage to its nuclear sites has been “significant” but has yet to confirm U.S. media and intelligence reports about the core of its facilities remaining intact. Iranians have also said that regardless of the scale of the destruction, the country will continue to operate its peaceful nuclear program.