Opinion | Operation Silent Hammer: How US Crushed Iran's Nuclear Backbone In A Single Night
Without warning and under a tightly sealed cloak of military secrecy, the US launched a strategic airstrike that not only caught Tehran off guard, but stunned much of the world
In the early hours of June 22, under the obsidian veil of an Iranian night sky, the rumble that shattered the silence wasn’t an earthquake, nor a rogue missile test – it was the unmistakable echo of America’s return to high-stakes preemptive warfare.
Without warning and under a tightly sealed cloak of military secrecy, the United States launched a strategic airstrike that not only caught Tehran off guard, but stunned much of the world. In less than an hour, three of Iran’s most fortified nuclear facilities – Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan – were either reduced to rubble or rendered inoperable by a mix of stealth bombers, submarine-launched cruise missiles, and the world’s most powerful non-nuclear penetrating bomb.
Recommended Stories
Fordow, buried deep beneath the mountains near Qom, and once considered immune to conventional air power, was directly targeted by the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, a 30,000-pound behemoth that had never before been used in combat. Simultaneously, waves of Tomahawk cruise missiles, launched from US submarines in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea, neutralised command centres, radar installations, and power grids surrounding the Natanz and Isfahan complexes — each a crucial link in Iran’s nuclear fuel cycle.
While official statements from the Pentagon described the mission as a “limited but decisive tactical operation", the implications were anything but limited. For the first time since the covert cyber campaign known as Stuxnet over a decade ago, the US had physically and unambiguously intervened in Iran’s nuclear progression — with destructive force, and without any publicly declared congressional authorisation.
What’s even more astonishing than the speed and precision of the strike was its message: that no matter how deeply a nation buries its ambitions — in concrete, in diplomacy, or in delay — Washington retains the will and the means to dig them out. This wasn’t a war declaration. It was a surgical dismemberment of a decades-old nuclear programme –televised in the aftermath, though invisible in execution.
Yet beneath the surface of this operation lies an intricate web of regional politics, clandestine intelligence sharing, and silent betrayals. Reports are now emerging of quiet coordination with Gulf allies, and even whispers of Pakistan’s passive support through signal intelligence relays and access corridors — moves that, if confirmed, would shatter Islamabad’s fragile ties with Tehran and redraw power dynamics across South Asia.
The attack wasn’t merely about bombs and bunkers. It was a geopolitical thunderclap — a cold, calculated, and precisely engineered shock meant to neutralise not just infrastructure, but intent. And as the dust settles over Iran’s shattered centrifuges and scorched tunnels, one question looms larger than the destruction itself: was this the end of Iran’s nuclear ambition, or just the beginning of a darker, more dangerous chapter?
DATE AND TIMING
Attacks occurred in the early hours of June 22, 2025, IRST (≈ June 21, 7 PM ET), timed to minimise civilian exposure and take advantage of night vision and stealth capabilities.
GEOPOLITICAL BACKDROP
- The strikes marked a dramatic escalation in the Iran-Israel war that began with Israeli attacks on Iranian military and nuclear sites since June 13.
- US intervention followed mounting pressure from regional allies and concerns about Iran’s potential nuclear breakout.
TARGET SELECTION AND COORDINATION
Three key facilities were struck: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Selection was based on their roles in uranium enrichment — critical within Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.
STRIKE CHOREOGRAPHY
- Submarine-launched Tomahawks initiated the assault, softening air defences and disrupting communications at Natanz and Isfahan.
- Stealth B‑2 Spirit bombers flew round-trip non-stop from Whiteman AFB (Missouri), refuelled mid-air (likely over the Pacific/Indian Ocean), and penetrated Iranian airspace under the cover of darkness.
- They deployed GBU‑57 Massive Ordnance Penetrators against the underground Fordow site and likely other hardened installations.
- All aircraft exited Iranian airspace safely, as per US reports.
STRATEGIC RATIONALE
The goal: obliterate Iran’s uranium enrichment capability — a critical milestone toward nuclear weapons. The US stressed on “precision destruction", signalling intention to limit escalation while removing a clear proliferation threat
WEAPONS USED: GBU-57 & TOMAHAWKS
GBU‑57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP)
- A 30,000‑pound “bunker-buster" specifically engineered to penetrate deeply entrenched, reinforced underground facilities.
- Its massive kinetic energy and delayed fuse allow it to burrow through metres of rock or reinforced concrete before detonating.
- Fordow, with its underground cavern designed to withstand airstrikes, typically required such a weapon.
- The GBU‑57 had never before been used in combat—its debut underscores the severity of the US escalation.
Why the MOP?
- Conventional bombs (for example, GBU‑31/28) lacked the necessary penetration depth to reach centrifuge cascades.
- Its deployment signals US resolve to physically eliminate Iran’s ability to enrich uranium.
Tomahawk Cruise Missiles
- Over 30 Tomahawks were fired from US submarines in the region targeting Natanz and Isfahan’s aboveground infrastructure.
- These sea-launched, precision-guided missiles are ideal for disabling air defences, communications, backup power, and surface-level buildings.
Combined Effect
The Tomahawks degraded defences and crippled key structures, setting the stage for the MOPs and reducing collateral damage.
AIRCRAFT USED: B-2 SPIRITS
- The Northrop Grumman B‑2 Spirit stealth bomber was the centrepiece of the operation.
- Capable of carrying multiple MOPs and penetrating dense, high-threat airspace, the B-2 flew from Missouri, likely staging near Guam, then onward to Iran, supported by aerial tankers.
- It’s built to evade radar and strike deep, fortified targets — perfect for Fordow, which sits inside a mountain
WHY THOSE TARGETS WERE SIGNIFICANT
Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant
- Located near Qom, Fordow is designed to be underground and fortified, making it impervious to most airstrikes.
- It is a crucial site for enriching uranium up to 20%, a threshold for weapons-grade material.
- Destroying Fordow sends a powerful message: even hardened nuclear infrastructure isn’t safe.
Natanz Nuclear Facility
- Iran’s major enrichment hub, Natanz houses thousands of centrifuges producing uranium enriched up to ~60%.
- While not as deeply buried as Fordow, the facility’s scale and importance made it a prime target.
- Its destruction would significantly delay Iran’s breakout timeline.
Isfahan Nuclear Technology Centre
- Responsible for converting uranium into gas for enrichment, fabricating fuel plates, and metallurgical processing.
- Attacking Isfahan disrupts the enrichment fuel cycle, ensuring that even if other sites recover, Iran cannot fuel them.
Strategic Calculus
- Together, these sites formed a synergistic network: raw material conversion, enrichment, and hardened storage.
- Multiple strikes ensure redundancy is broken, halting the entire nuclear chain.
IMPLICATIONS FOR IRAN’S NUCLEAR AMBITIONS
Short- to mid-term Impact
- Destruction of centrifuges, infrastructure, and hardened installations will set Iran’s programme back years, perhaps three to five years, depending on recovery routes.
- Reconstituting centrifuge arrays, underground capabilities, and industrial capacity isn’t rapid or easy.
Strategic Deterrent & Diplomatic Pressure
- With key facilities gone, Iran faces heightened scrutiny from the IAEA and stronger calls for extended inspections or new restrictions.
- Signal that even US homeland security may be at stake could pressure Iranian moderates or the regime to reconsider nuclear ambitions.
Risk of Nuclear Breakout Shift
- Iran may decide to accelerate covert activities, moving centrifuges to undisclosed sites or investing in tactical nukes.
- Alternatively, domestic outrage or national humiliation may galvanise the regime to double down and rebuild.
Regional Ripple Effects
- Alters the calculus for Middle East players: Gulf states may now pursue their own deterrents; Israel sees US resolve; Europe faces pressure on its Iran policy.
- It may even shift nuclear architecture globally, prompting new non-proliferation efforts or a nuclear domino effect.
Likely Retaliation & Escalation
- Iran has vowed “severe consequences". While it may avoid direct nuclear response, it likely sanctions Iran-backed groups (Hezbollah, Houthis) to attack US/Israeli interests.
- The strike sets a precedent: preemptive decapitation of nuclear programmes may become normalised, raising instability.
PAKISTAN’S ROLE: SIGINT SUPPORT AND ALLEGATIONS OF ‘BACK-STABBING’
While initial reports focus on US-Israel coordination, Pakistan’s role raises critical questions:
Possible Logistics and Support
- US aircraft required air-to-air refuelling across the Pacific and Indian Ocean. Pakistan’s airbases (eg Karachi, Islamabad) may have offered staging or support.
- No public confirmation yet — but it’s technically plausible, given US-Pakistan collaboration on previous campaigns (eg Afghanistan).
SIGINT and Intelligence Flow
- Pakistan possesses listening posts and signal interception assets in southwest Asia that might detect Iranian communications and missile traffic.
- If Islamabad shared such data, it would significantly aid targeting precision and defence suppression.
Allegations of Betrayal
- Tehran’s circle likely views Pakistan’s cooperation — if confirmed — as diplomatic betrayal, given historic Tehran-Islamabad ties.
- Domestically, Islamabad faces balancing acts: maintaining ties with Saudi-US axis while managing Iran connections.
Islamabad’s Likely Approach
- Pakistan is expected to remain officially silent or deny involvement to maintain internal stability and regional neutrality.
- Covert cooperation is plausible, if diplomatically risky.
LOOKING FORWARD: BROADER CONSEQUENCES & STRATEGIC LANDSCAPE
US Domestic And Legal Impact
- Democrats, legal scholars, and Congressional leaders called the strike unconstitutional, citing the War Powers Resolution.
- Impeachment calls and debates on executive war authority are resurfacing.
International Law and Global Response
- The UN Secretary-General and nations like Australia criticised the strikes as escalation; Russia signals mediation readiness .
- Iran maintains the strikes violate the NPT and international law.
Broader Regional Arms Race
- Gulf monarchies like Saudi Arabia, UAE may see nuclear hedging as viable, shifted by US willingness to strike nuclear facilities.
- Turkey, Egypt, Jordan rethink their strategic umbrellas and possible nuclear options in response.
Iran’s Resilience
- Tehran may pivot to covert enrichment, relocate centrifuge operations to civilian sites, or employ undisclosed underground bunkers.
- Domestic politics may polarise: hawkish elements demanding revenge vs. pragmatists urging diplomacy.
US-Pakistan Ties
- Islamabad’s covert assistance, if verified, might deepen defense ties with Washington—but risks backlash from Iran and internal factions.
- Regional alignments may shift subtly, with Pakistan cautiously repositioning based on balancing U.S. support against regional backlash.
KEY FACTS
| Category | Details |
| Date | June 22, 2025 (Iran time), June 21, 2025 (US time). |
| Targets | Fordow, Natanz, Isfahan nuclear sites |
| Weapons | 12 × GBU‑57 MOP bunker‑busters; 30 × Tomahawk cruise missiles |
| Aircraft | B‑2 Spirit stealth bombers; refuel support from tankers; submarines launched missiles |
| Execution | Synchronized hack/EMS disruption, missile strikes, bomber penetration, precision bombing |
| Strategic effect | Disrupted Iran’s nuclear chain (centrifuges, enrichment, fuel prep); delays program by years; sets deterrent tone |
| Legal/political fallout | U.S. domestic legal challenges; international condemnation; escalates Middle East tensions |
| Iran response | Denies nuclear intent, vows retaliation, may accelerate covert nuclear efforts |
FINAL THOUGHTS
The US strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities is a watershed moment — marking a juncture where policy, military capability, and strategic messaging merged to physically dismantle Iran’s enrichment infrastructure. The use of GBU‑57 MOPs and stealth B‑2 bombers underscored Trump and his intent, while targeting Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan removed key nodes critical to weapons-grade enrichment.
Moving forward, regional dynamics are dramatically altered: Iran must decide between clandestine renewal or capitulation; Gulf states reassess their security doctrines; Pakistan potentially recalibrates its strategic partnerships; and international non‑proliferation architecture is poised for upheaval.
Most importantly, the incident raises severe questions about preemptive military force, sovereignty of nuclear-capable states, and the unchecked authority of the executive in deploying strategic military power — without congressional approval.
(Group Capt MJ Augustine Vinod VSM (retd) tweets at @mjavinod. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18’s views)
About the Author
