Trump Shifts Nuclear Strategy, Targets Iran’s Fortified Mountain Facility for First Time

President Donald Trump has begun threatening military action against Iran’s Pickaxe Mountain nuclear facility, a subterranean installation the United States had previously avoided targeting during prior bombing campaigns. Located more than 100 meters underground near the Natanz nuclear enrichment complex, Pickaxe was constructed as a successor to an above-ground assembly plant destroyed in 2020 that once produced approximately 6,000 advanced centrifuges annually. Iranian officials described the replacement structure as larger and more sophisticated, positioned deep within the mountain to house a centrifuge assembly line, enrichment operations or nuclear weaponization equipment.

The Trump administration has offered limited clarity on what prompted the sudden focus on Pickaxe or whether intelligence agencies have confirmed that centrifuges actually occupy the facility. Military analysts remain divided on whether conventional airstrikes possess sufficient penetrating power to destroy the structure’s interior chambers or can only temporarily seal its entrances. The extreme depth protecting Iran’s nuclear infrastructure may exceed the destructive capability of America’s most advanced bunker-busting munitions currently available.

Trump stated Tuesday that strikes would occur “pretty soon” and “very heavily,” following reports from The Wall Street Journal citing Israeli intelligence claiming Iran transported thousands of centrifuges into Pickaxe during late 2024. While Trump acknowledged the transfer “may have” happened, he indicated the United States lacked independent verification. Trump emphasized that centrifuge presence alone posed minimal threat without accompanying enriched uranium.

Before June 2025 operations, the International Atomic Energy Agency documented Iran’s possession of 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60%, theoretically sufficient for approximately 10 nuclear weapons if further processed. Iranian officials stored most material at Isfahan, with additional quantities at Natanz and Fordow, though inspectors have subsequently lost the ability to verify stockpile location, quantity or condition. The Institute for Science and International Security maintains that uranium remains confined to those three sites and has not detected enriched material entering Pickaxe.

Satellite imagery indicates ongoing construction activity but provides no evidence that Pickaxe functions operationally, according to Washington-based analysts. February photographs documented Iran reinforcing tunnel entrances with concrete and structural hardening apparently designed to withstand airstrikes. Smaller enclosed vehicles observed near facility openings might suggest interior preparation efforts, though commercial imagery cannot establish vehicle contents.

Spencer Faragasso, senior research fellow at the Institute for Science and International Security, explained that earlier U.S. and Israeli operations targeted active enrichment capacity, and Pickaxe previously contained “nothing of priority” warranting expenditure of advanced penetrating weapons. However, Faragasso noted that covered trucks could transport centrifuges undetected by commercial satellite surveillance, making reported Israeli assessments plausible despite remaining unconfirmed by independent analysis. The facility represents one of the last major Iranian nuclear sites not yet attacked, potentially explaining its current strategic prominence.

Trump did not initially emphasize Pickaxe during Operation Epic Fury’s opening phase. Conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt introduced the facility during a July 13 interview, prompting Trump to describe it as a potential target for a “nice big fat shot right into the front door.” When Hewitt urged action, Trump responded: “We’re going to take out Pickaxe Mountain. Tell the Iranians to be ready.”

Whether American forces could successfully destroy Pickaxe remains contested among defense specialists. Nicole Grajewski, assistant professor at Sciences Po and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace scholar, called destruction “very close to impossible” through air campaigns comparable to operations against Fordow. Pickaxe exceeds Fordow in depth and fortification while lacking publicly identified structural vulnerabilities previously exploited.

Retired Air Force Brigadier General Robert Spalding, former B-2 commander, stated that planners must first determine whether objectives require facility destruction or merely operational denial. If total destruction proves unfeasible, the U.S. could prevent Iran from accessing the site and introducing necessary personnel and equipment for operation. Analysts have identified two possible ventilation shaft locations via satellite imagery, though internal design details remain unavailable for confirmation.

Collapsing tunnel entrances represents a minimum viable strike option, potentially generating internal shock wave damage without guaranteeing comprehensive destruction, according to Faragasso. Such action would force Iran to conduct visible excavation efforts before reopening the facility, triggering potential additional military response. However, Iran has previously reopened missile tunnels following attacks, meaning sustained closure might require continuous surveillance and repeated strikes.

Grajewski cautioned that striking Pickaxe would provide symbolic value against a prominent Iranian nuclear facility but would not fundamentally compromise Iran’s broader nuclear development program. She characterized the facility as “very high-value” while emphasizing it represents only a component of Iran’s overall nuclear infrastructure. The White House declined comment regarding the strategic rationale for increased Pickaxe focus.