Army chief of staff ordered to retire immediately as Hegseth continues Pentagon shakeup
War Secretary Pete Hegseth asked Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George to step down and take immediate retirement Thursday in a sweeping leadership shakeup as the U.S. military remains engaged in combat with Iran. A senior War Department official told Fox that Hegseth called George Thursday and asked for his immediate retirement, saying, “It was time for a leadership change in the Army.” Chief spokesperson Sean Parnell said in a statement on X, “General Randy A. George will be retiring from his position as the 41st Chief of Staff of the Army effective immediately. The Department of War is grateful for General George’s decades of service to our nation. We wish him well in his retirement.” PENTAGON CITES ‘MERITOCRACY’ AS REPORTED OFFICER PROMOTION REMOVALS DRAW DEMOCRATIC CRITICISM An Army official told Fox News Hegseth did not give George any reason for asking him to step down. George, the Army’s top uniformed officer and a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was nominated by President Joe Biden and confirmed by the Senate in 2023. He had been expected to serve a four-year term through roughly 2027. Prior to becoming Army chief, George, a career infantry officer with combat tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, served as senior military assistant to Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin from 2021 to 2022, according to his official biography. Gen. Christopher LaNeve, the Army’s vice chief of staff, will serve as acting chief, according to a senior War Department official. The move underscores growing tensions between Hegseth and Army Secretary Dan Driscoll. Hegseth recently intervened to remove multiple Army officers from a promotion list after Driscoll refused to do so, an unusual step, a U.S. official told Fox News. PETE HEGSETH SLASHES MILITARY ‘FAITH CODES’ FROM OVER 200 TO 31 IN PENTAGON CHAPLAIN CORPS OVERHAUL The disagreement caught the attention of the White House, which reviews senior military promotion lists before they are sent to the Senate, the official said. The abrupt removal also marks the latest in a series of high-level military leadership changes under Hegseth, who has moved aggressively to reshape senior ranks. The shakeups have included the removal or sidelining of several top uniformed leaders across the services, such as former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr. and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti, both of whom were pushed out earlier in the second Trump administration. Other moves have reached deep into the military’s senior leadership pipeline. Hegseth replaced the Army’s vice chief of staff earlier in 2026 and removed Lt. Gen. Jennifer Short from her role as senior military assistant, installing close allies in key advisory positions.
GOP rails against ‘s— sandwich’ deal as all eyes turn to House to end DHS shutdown
The House is primed to end the record-breaking Homeland Security shutdown, but Republicans are still fuming over a “s— sandwich” deal from the Senate. The Senate again advanced its partial Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill on Thursday after being derailed by a House GOP rebellion. The frustration among House Republicans hasn’t gone anywhere, however, with lawmakers railing against House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., during a members-only call on Thursday afternoon. The simmering anger comes after Johnson made a swift reversal, spurred by President Donald Trump, and backed Senate Majority Leader John Thune’s, R-S.D., on a two-track approach Wednesday that would pass the Senate’s partial DHS bill while funding Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in a forthcoming party-line reconciliation package. A senior GOP aide told Fox News Digital that House Republicans wanted to see action from their Senate counterparts on reconciliation and were frustrated with how the upper chamber handled the DHS deal, which the source said amounted to a “s— sandwich.” BEHIND THE SCENES OF CONGRESS’ ELEVENTH-HOUR RUSH TO FUND THE DHS House Republicans are incensed at the Senate plan, which carves out funding for ICE and CBP. Still, the bill is expected to pass with bipartisan support. “People are mad at Johnson,” one source familiar with the call told Fox News. But for now, House Republicans are in no hurry to return to Washington, D.C., to end the 48-day shutdown. The House is next scheduled to return on April 14. A source familiar with the call told Fox News Digital that leadership is not expected to ask members to return to Washington early to vote on the measure. A source told Fox News that there was “a lot of frustration” with the situation. “Does feel like whiplash,” the source said. “Not happy,” another person familiar with the call said. “Not willing to vote for anything that defunds law enforcement absent tangible action from Senate. Thune should call Senate back today.” Some House Republicans argued the chamber must fund the president’s immigration and border security efforts through reconciliation before considering the Senate bill — despite the budget reconciliation process expected to take months. This viewpoint was expressed by a broad group within the conference, not just the conservative flank, according to a source familiar with the call. If Johnson proceeded first with the Senate bill, conservative opposition could determine how he brings the legislation to the floor. In the event he lacks conference-wide support for the upper chamber’s partial DHS bill, he could be forced to call up the Senate bill under suspension of House rules. That strategy — requiring a two-thirds majority to pass — risks upsetting conservatives if the DHS bill relies on Democratic votes to clear the chamber. HOUSE REPUBLICANS PASS RIVAL DHS PLAN, SETTING UP SENATE FIGHT AS SHUTDOWN SET TO BECOME LONGEST IN HISTORY House lawmakers could have used the same fast-track process Thursday to pass the DHS bill that was done in the Senate, but opted not to. Thune said Thursday that he didn’t know when the House would move on the bill, but noted that when they did, Republicans would begin a sprint to complete the budget reconciliation process. “My assumption is, at some point, hopefully they’ll move it,” Thune said. “And you know, [with] the understanding that we’re going to come behind it with the Recon bill. I mean, I think this whole — where we are is just a regrettable place.” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s, D-N.Y., demanded that the House GOP immediately take up the bill and accused them of now owning “the longest government shutdown in history.” “The deep division and dysfunction among House Republicans is needlessly extending the DHS shutdown and hurting federal workers who are missing another paycheck,” Schumer said. “The Senate did its work twice to fund key parts of DHS without funding the lawlessness of ICE and Border Patrol.” But Trump has already teed up a counter, and plans to pay DHS employees through an executive order. “Because the Democrats are fully and 100% committed to the Radical Left Policy of Open Borders and Zero Immigration Enforcement (which will hopefully cost them dearly in the Midterms!), allowing Murderers and Criminals of all types into our Country, totally unchecked and unvetted, I will soon sign an order to pay ALL of the incredible employees at the Department of Homeland Security,” Trump said on Truth Social.
Bondi ouster ignites bipartisan uproar: ‘Partisan, petulant, political hack’
Democrats are jubilant over the sudden ouster of Pam Bondi as head of the Department of Justice, with leading party members taking to social media to say “good riddance.” Democrats rejoiced on X after President Donald Trump took to Truth Social on Thursday to confirm reports that Bondi was leaving her position as U.S. attorney general. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote, “Good riddance. Pam Bondi was the wrong choice from the start.” He went on to assert that “the rot at the Department of Justice begins and ends with Donald Trump,” writing, “As long as his focus is on using DOJ as a tool for revenge and not law enforcement, the cover-up of the Epstein files, along with the countless other problems at DOJ, will continue.” PAM BONDI ALREADY FIRED AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, CABINET OFFICIAL TEED UP AS REPLACEMENT: SOURCES Prominent Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., a former Democratic presidential candidate, claimed that Bondi “will be remembered for blocking the release of the Epstein files, weaponizing the DOJ to go after Trump’s political opponents, and handing out merger approvals as political favors.” “Under AG Pam Bondi, the DOJ became a cesspool of corruption,” she asserted, piling on another, “Good riddance.” Sen. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., who during his time in the House of Representatives oversaw the Jan. 6 hearings, reacted by writing that Bondi “oversaw an unprecedented weaponization of the Justice Department that brought our nation’s rule of law to its knees.” “Countless and baseless political investigations, hundreds of career law enforcement professionals purged, a massive cover-up of the Epstein files, and a wholesale effort to turn the department into a criminal law firm representing the person of the president instead of the American people,” Schiff alleged, adding, “But Pam Bondi was merely a symptom of Donald Trump’s chronic allergy to our nation’s laws.” On the House side, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., wrote, “Pam Bondi is a partisan, petulant, political hack. And now she’s GONE.” “Pam Bondi has been fired. Good riddance,” Jeffries wrote in another post, adding, “Pete Hegseth is next.” “Keep the pressure on every single one of these extremists,” he wrote. House Democratic firebrand Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, who recently lost her bid for the party’s Senate nomination in Texas, went on a profane rant after the news broke. “Well… first it was Kristi Noem, now it’s Pam Bondi… it would be too much like right that Pete be next,” she gloated. “I see a theme. He will throw the incompetent women under the bus a lot faster than the incompetent men.” “Let’s just agree that America needs a ‘do over,’” wrote Crockett. “The President nominated these awful people, the Republican controlled Senate confirmed them, and well… too many people thought we should give this much power to the P—- grabbing, 6x bankruptcy filing, 34 count convicted felon bestie of Epstein. WE NEED A DO OVER… but only if America would do better.” Rep. Yassamin Ansari, D-Ariz., said Bondi “must still comply with our subpoena and testify before the [House] Oversight Committee about her criminally botched Epstein Files release.” “She may be fired, but she is not above the law,” wrote Ansari. “We won’t stop fighting until every victim gets justice and everyone complicit in this cover up is held accountable, no matter how powerful they are.” JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SECURES DENATURALIZATION OF CONVICTED GUN TRAFFICKER AND HEALTH CARE FRAUDSTER Democrats were not the only ones happy about Bondi’s firing. Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., who has in recent months defied both her party and the administration, accused Bondi of having “handled the Epstein Files in a terrible manner and seriously undermined President Trump.” Mace claimed that Bondi “has stonewalled every effort to hold the guilty accountable,” adding that “the American people deserve an Attorney General who is transparent and delivers real accountability.” Following reports that Trump is considering replacing Bondi with current Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin, Mace wrote if these reports are true, “I welcome it.” “I look forward to a new Attorney General committed to getting justice for the victims of Jeffrey Epstein,” she wrote. However, Bondi was not universally reviled following the news. Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., defended Bondi, calling her “a great friend and one of the best lawyers I’ve ever met.” “She did an incredible job as Florida’s Attorney General when I was Governor, and she has been an incredible U.S. Attorney General,” wrote Scott. “Ann and I are proud of all Pam has accomplished to make America safe again and restore the rule of law. Thank you, [Pam Bondi]!” Former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz also came to Bondi’s defense. Gaetz resigned from Congress to be Trump’s attorney general before withdrawing his nomination amid mounting resistance, clearing the way for Bondi. Gaetz wrote, “Pam Bondi will be known as one of the great crime fighters of our time. She is a patriot who has all of our appreciation.” SENATE CONFIRMS DOJ FRAUD CHIEF AS MINNESOTA DAYCARE SCANDAL DRAWS NATIONAL SCRUTINY He predicted that Todd Blanche, who Trump announced will be temporarily filling in for Bondi as interim U.S. attorney general, will likewise “do a great job for the Trump/Vance Administration and us all.” Blanche himself took to social media to write, “Pam Bondi led this Department with strength and conviction and I’m grateful for her leadership and friendship.” “Thank you to President Trump for the trust and the opportunity to serve as Acting Attorney General,” he continued. “We will continue backing the blue, enforcing the law, and doing everything in our power to keep America safe.” Political analyst Jonathan Turley wrote that “the news of the departure of Pam Bondi hit with a thunderclap in Washington.” “There were some recent rumors, but nothing concrete in the prior week. Bondi is the ultimate loyalist who, like Todd Blanche (the new acting AG), earned her bones in the trenches with the President in impeachment and criminal trials,” he wrote. Turley predicted that “the move to Blanche will be seamless” and said that
Harris ripped over video previewing Trump speech she claims she wouldn’t watch: ‘Sit this one out’
Former Vice President Kamala Harris drew a sharp rebuke from conservatives on social media Wednesday where she previewed President Donald Trump’s address to the nation on Iran. “He brought America into a war that people don’t want, he has put American troops in harm’s way, costs are rising by the day, and meanwhile he has done nothing to address the needs of the people of America,” Harris posted on X before Trump’s Wednesday night speech to the nation, a speech Harris says in the video she “won’t be able” to watch. Harris predicted Trump would attempt to “claim victory” in Iran but the “reality is we’re watching what he does instead of listening to what he says.” The video, viewed almost 3 million times on X, was widely panned by conservatives who pointed to high prices during the Biden administration, other criticisms of the administration, and Harris’ political ambitions. KAMALA HARRIS HARSHLY CRITIQUES PRESIDENT TRUMP’S SOTU SPEECH WHICH TRIGGERS RESPONSE FROM WHITE HOUSE “It’s pretty disgraceful for you to claim President Trump has done nothing to meet the needs of the American people,” Republican Rep. Tom Emmer posted on X. “Here’s the truth: He’s cleaning up the chaos YOU caused here in the United States and across the globe, and is making America great again. On top of that, he has the guts to confront the Iranian regime, the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world!” “The time off hasn’t made her any smarter,” America First Legal senior adviser Ian Prior posted on X. “She wants to run for President,” former Trump White House chief of staff Mark Meadows posted on X. WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW: 5 KEY TAKEAWAYS FROM TRUMP’S IRAN ADDRESS “Bullet dodged,” conservative radio host Larry O’Connor posted on X. “‘Don’t. Your plan to handle Iran was letting them spend Obama’s pallets of cash on missiles and nukes,” Republican candidate for Oklahoma Lt. Gov. T.W. Shannon posted on X. “You let in 15M illegal aliens into this country,” Gokhshtein Media CEO David Gokhshtein posted on X. “Sit this one out.” In a statement to Fox News Digital, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said, “Kamala Harris oversaw the disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan and ushered in an invasion of migrant criminals into our homeland. She should listen to the overwhelming majority of Americans who want her to crawl under a coconut tree and go away.” Trump delivered his address to the nation later that night declaring Iran is “essentially really no longer a threat” after a 32-day U.S. military campaign, telling Americans that the country has been “eviscerated” following weeks of strikes. Even so, Trump said the United States is preparing additional attacks in the coming weeks even as diplomatic discussions continue. “I can say tonight that we are on track to complete all of America’s military objectives shortly. Very shortly, we are going to hit them extremely hard over the next two to three weeks,” Trump said. “We’re going to bring them back to the Stone Ages where they belong. In the meantime, discussions are ongoing.” Fox News Digital’s Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.
California hit with fresh setback in failed gender secrecy case costing taxpayers millions
California was dealt another blow in a lawsuit over gender secrecy policies in schools when a federal judge ordered the state this week to pay the plaintiffs in the case $4.5 million in taxpayer-funded legal fees. Judge Roger Benitez, an appointee of President George W. Bush, scolded state lawyers in his order for what he said was an “unusual” spree of court motions that forced the parents and teachers who brought the lawsuit to respond to California’s “litigation intransigence.” The lawsuit challenged California’s SAFETY Act, which blocked schools from requiring staff to notify parents if a student sought to change their gender identity or pronouns. The Supreme Court rejected the policy in March and jurisdictions with similar policies have subsequently been hit with legal threats to repeal them. Benitez also tacked on added financial penalties, in addition to the legal fees reimbursement, to reach the $4.5 million figure because the case concerned a “very important subject,” he said. NJ SCHOOL DISTRICT’S SECRETIVE TRANSGENDER POLICY FACES LEGAL THREAT FOR BUCKING SUPREME COURT “State public education policies impinged on families’ right to the free exercise of religion under the First Amendment. The policies also rejected and subverted the federal constitutional rights of California parents to guide the health and well-being of their school-age children,” Benitez wrote. “Such concerns intrude among the most important areas of family life in America’s history and tradition.” The lawsuit, brought against California Attorney General Rob Bonta, had argued that the state imposed an unconstitutional policy on schools that blocked teachers and staff from informing parents if their child wanted to change their gender. CALIFORNIA SCHOOL DISTRICT LETS STUDENTS CHANGE NAMES AND GENDER IDENTITY IN SECRET FROM PARENTS The Supreme Court sided with the parents in a 6-3 emergency order, saying California’s policy, which blocked what critics described as schools’ “forced outing” of students, was likely unconstitutional. The Thomas More Society, a conservative legal group, represented the plaintiffs in the case and recently warned a school district in New Jersey that it would begin legal action if the school district did not repeal a similar policy on transgender students. “This is just the beginning,” Peter Breen, Thomas More Society executive vice president, told Fox News Digital of its warning to the Westwood Regional School Board. “This is not an end, but a beginning, our big win in the Supreme Court. We are already fielding requests from other parents across the country, and we anticipate sending a lot more demand letters, unfortunately.” Fox News Digital reached out to Bonta’s office for comment.
Trump administration accused of violating court order by sharing Medicaid data with ICE
More than a dozen Democratic-led states are accusing the Trump administration of violating a federal court order by sharing Medicaid data with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, asking a judge to enforce the ruling. The states’ complaint asks the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to enforce its existing injunction blocking HHS from sharing Medicaid data with ICE. “The Trump Administration appears to be defying a direct court order blocking it from sharing the personal, sensitive data of individuals including U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. It’s invasive — and deeply troubling,” said California Attorney General Bonta, who led the coalition of 22 states. “When Californians signed up for Medi-Cal, they did so with the understanding that their data would not be used for purposes unrelated to administering this program. I urge the court to enforce its earlier order and make clear that these guardrails exist for anyone who is lawfully residing in the United States.” The complaint stems from a lawsuit spearheaded by California in July 2025 against the Trump administration. The lawsuit accused Health and Human Services of violating federal law through its “mass transfer of sensitive Medicaid data” of both lawful permanent and temporary residents. The lawsuit also argued that the sharing of the personal information will likely create a “chilling effect on individuals’ willingness to enroll in Medicaid programs” for which they are legally eligible. SECOND FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS IRS FROM SHARING ADDRESSES WITH ICE A federal judge ruled last December that the Trump administration is not allowed to collect the personal information of lawful permanent residents or citizens, but that it can continue to collect basic information from individuals such as addresses, birthdates and immigration status for residents with temporary status. However, the scope of data that can be collected is limited and cannot include sensitive health information. The attorneys general accuse Health and Human Services of sharing “a large and complex” set of data on Medicaid recipients with ICE, which is in violation of a federal court ruling allowing the exchange of limited personal information but excluding the information of legal permanent residents. The complaint also accuses the Trump administration of failing to share its criteria for determining if a resident is being “lawfully present.” CATO Institute Senior Legal Fellow Dan Greenberg told Fox News Digital there is “a strong possibility” that HHS and ICE violated the district court’s order. LETITIA JAMES SUES HHS OVER TYING FEDERAL FUNDS TO TRANSGENDER POLICY “The reason this is a strong possibility is that DHHS communications apparently indicate that it shared a ‘large and complex’ dataset of Medicaid recipients with ICE,” Greenberg said. “That phrase suggests that the dataset that was shared with ICE may have included information that is outside the scope of the court order. That is a question of fact: that is why the states are now asking the court to compel the federal government to explain just what was shared and how it is now being used.” Greenberg also pointed out that the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System database does not “appear to have any simple or direct way to identify/single out immigrants who are undocumented,” making “information-sharing that complies with that court order difficult or impossible.” “The TMSIS identifies people who are only eligible for emergency Medicaid services, but the problem is that this class of people includes both undocumented and lawfully present immigrants,” Greenberg said. “In short, it is as if the court order said that only some of the information in one particular file should be disclosed, but there is reason to believe that DHHS decided that — because they can’t figure out how to separate out this particular type of information – they may have handed over the whole filing cabinet.” In addition to California, attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin, and the governor of Kentucky signed on to the complaint. Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and Health and Human Services for comment.
NY House GOP launches pressure campaign on Hochul to scrap climate law over soaring energy costs
New York House Republicans are ramping up a pressure campaign against Gov. Kathy Hochul, D-N.Y., citing her failure to combat rising utility costs in the Empire State. The group of lawmakers, led by Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., is calling on Hochul to scrap the state’s 2019 climate law that they blame for “skyrocketing” energy prices. “Utility bills are at the center of the affordability crisis with New York,” the lawmakers wrote in a letter to Hochul Thursday, citing a study that found electricity prices in New York were the sixth highest in the nation in December and 59% higher than the national average. “Given these significant cost burdens, we strongly urge that the CLCPA [Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act] be repealed.” FROM ‘JUMP ON A BUS’ TO TAX CRACKDOWNS: BLUE STATES CHASE WEALTHY RESIDENTS FLEEING TO RED HAVENS The letter comes as Hochul, who is up for re-election in November and appears to be branding herself as a pragmatist on affordability issues, has acknowledged the “cataclysmic” costs for households and businesses if the law is implemented on schedule. That acknowledgment comes despite her long-standing support for the law, which passed under former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, D-N.Y. “Put simply, something has got to give,” Hochul wrote in an op-ed in March. “[T]he undeniable fact is we cannot meet the Climate Act’s 2030 targets without imposing new and additional crushing costs on New York businesses and residents.” A Feb. 26 memo released by the Hochul administration found that households would pay $4,000 in additional energy costs per year if the state penalizes oil and gas producers as called for by the law. It also found the climate mandate would increase gas prices by $2.23 a gallon. However, she has stopped short of backing a full repeal. In March, Hochul proposed delaying enforcement targets while keeping the law’s 2050 target of net-zero emissions in place. Republicans, who see an opening to go on offense on affordability issues in deep-blue states, have ripped the governor’s efforts to move the enforcement goalposts while keeping the law in place. “The basic fact is this: the 2019 Climate Law was based on faulty assumptions and was enacted using wishful thinking instead of hard facts,” the GOP lawmakers wrote. “It is time to inform the citizens of our state about the realities of the 2019 Climate Law and acknowledge that its goals are unattainable, its costs are too high, and it is overall destructive to our state’s economy.” TRUMP FLIPS DEMS’ ‘AFFORDABILITY’ SCRIPT, TURNING BUZZWORD INTO MAGA MATERIAL AS MAMDANI VISIT LOOMS The debate over New York’s climate law comes as Democrats across the country are walking back aggressive environmental and climate policies amid surging electric bills and growing voter concern about the cost of living. “It is essential that the implementation of the energy transition move forward on an affordable and practical basis to protect ratepayers from skyrocketing energy costs,” the GOP lawmakers wrote. The group is also demanding that Hochul provide “immediate relief” to New Yorkers by redirecting several billion dollars in unspent ratepayer-collected funds back to residents facing high electric bills as utility bill credits. More than 60% of New Yorkers said keeping energy costs affordable is more important than lowering greenhouse gas emissions, according to an April 2025 Siena College poll. Hochul’s office fired back at House Republicans in a statement to Fox News Digital, accusing the New York delegation of supporting policies that drive up costs. “While New York Republicans in Congress continue to bend the knee to President Trump, axing clean energy projects and killing jobs in their own districts, Governor Hochul is taking a realistic approach to clean energy progress,” Hochul spokesperson Emma Wallner said. “The Governor is laser-focused on bringing down energy costs for families, but congressional Republicans refuse to offer tangible solutions and are only making life harder — and more expensive — for their constituents.”
Iran releases mocking missile launch video after Trump threats
NewsFeed Iranian state media released footage showing the launch of missiles plastered with messages mocking Donald Trump following the US president’s threat to bomb Iran “back to the Stone Ages.” Published On 2 Apr 20262 Apr 2026 Click here to share on social media share2 Share googleAdd Al Jazeera on Googleinfo Adblock test (Why?)
Can the US seize Iran’s enriched uranium – and what are the risks?
United States President Donald Trump is reportedly considering dispatching US special forces to Iran to seize the country’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium in what experts say would be a complicated and risky military operation. Ensuring that Iran has no nuclear weapons, nor the capacity to produce any using enriched uranium, has been one of the US’s main stated demands during talks with Iranian officials over the past year. It was also the central justification Washington used when it bombed Iranian nuclear facilities during Iran’s 12-day war with Israel last year and for starting the ongoing conflict in February, despite being in active talks with Iran at the time. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list Iran maintains that its nuclear programme is for civilian energy purposes only, despite having enriched uranium far beyond the threshold required for that. Iranian officials have stated they are open to discussing reducing the level of enrichment in past negotiations, but have refused to dismantle Iran’s nuclear programme entirely, a matter of national sovereignty, they say. In 2015, the former Obama administration negotiated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran and other nations. Under that, Iran agreed not to enrich uranium to high levels and to be subjected to frequent inspections. However, Trump withdrew the US from this agreement during his first term as president. Here is what we know about Iran’s uranium. What enriched uranium does Iran have, and where is it? Currently, Iran is believed to have about 440 kilograms (970 pounds) of uranium enriched to 60 percent – the level at which it becomes much faster to get to the 90 percent threshold needed to produce a nuclear weapon. That amount is enough, theoretically, to produce more than 10 nuclear warheads, International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi told Al Jazeera in early March. Advertisement At the time, Grossi said almost half of the 60-percent-enriched uranium was probably still being stored in the tunnel complex at Iran’s Isfahan nuclear facility. An unknown quantity is also believed to be stored at the Natanz facility. These two underground nuclear sites, along with a third at Fordow, were destroyed or badly damaged in US-Israeli air strikes in the 12-day war last year and have been targeted during the current conflict. Even if the US knows where the enriched uranium is, a military ground operation to extract it would face significant chemical, logistical, and tactical hurdles, however, experts say. How would US forces access the uranium? With great difficulty, military experts told Al Jazeera. Isfahan, where about half of the enriched uranium is believed to be stored, is more than 480 kilometres (about 300 miles) inland, hundreds of kilometres away from the nearest US naval ships. That means that US forces, possibly alongside Israeli troops, would need to be transported over a very long distance through an active warzone. They would also have to bring in heavy equipment, including excavators, as tunnel entrances are believed to be buried under rubble following US-Israeli aerial attacks. Once there, ground forces would have to secure a substantial perimeter around the site and then hold that territory for as long as the operation to dig the nuclear material out from the underground facilities may take. “To send advanced units to the cordon the area, to start an excavation project, the duration of which is impossible to quantify, all the while remaining safe from what would be nearly constant fire from Iran, this is risky and not feasible,” said Jason Campbell, senior fellow at the Middle East Institute. “I don’t see any senior planning military officer pursuing this,” Campbell, who was also a former senior US defence official in the Obama and Trump administrations, added. This image from an Airbus Defence and Space’s Pléiades Neo satellite shows a truck in the upper lefthand corner that analysts believe was carrying highly enriched uranium to a tunnel in the compound of the Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center, in Isfahan, Iran, on June 9, 2025 [Airbus Defence and Space© via AP] Cheryl Rofer, a former radiochemist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, estimates that the uranium is most likely being stored in the form of hexafluoride gas. This gas is difficult to handle and reacts with water to produce extremely toxic and corrosive chemicals. Advertisement The uranium hexafluoride must be stored in small, separated canisters to prevent neutrons from multiplying out of control and causing an intense radiation burst. This means that the cylinders would have to be kept at a distance from each other and that any damage to them as a result of an air strike or an accident during hurried transport could trigger the release of toxic chemicals, posing a radiological hazard to nearby personnel, explained Francois Diaz-Maurin, editor for nuclear affairs at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, in an article earlier this month. There is also the option of destroying the cylinders on the spot, instead of transporting them. The US Army has three special units called Army Nuclear Disablement Teams, which are trained to dismantle and destroy nuclear equipment and materials. “But exploding the stockpile would chemically contaminate the immediate surroundings with toxic uranyl fluoride, creating a lasting environmental hazard,” explained Diaz-Maurin. Furthermore, it would be difficult to determine whether all cylinders had been destroyed, leaving the risk that Iran could retrieve enough to manufacture a nuclear weapon. “This is not a few helicopters and a couple of hours of activity – it is a much more complicated thing,” Ian Lesser, a distinguished fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, told Al Jazeera. “And you would [have to] have absolute confidence that you could get it all out, or you would give the Iranian authorities enormous incentive to move on next month or year with the nuclear programme to establish a deterrent against further aggression.” A much less risky approach would be for the US to strike a deal with Iran – something negotiators were attempting to do when the US and
US reinforcements are coming to the Gulf – but what does victory look like?
[unable to retrieve full-text content] Al Jazeera’s defence editor looks at how the US-Israeli attack on Iran has become a regional war