In the midst of escalating political and military tensions, the topic of Iran's nuclear and missile programs has become a focal point of discussion in Washington. The Trump administration is actively leading a campaign to justify the possibility of a new military confrontation with Tehran. However, two parallel readings—a comprehensive investigative report published by The New York Times and a political analysis by Lebanese journalist Kim Ghattas in the Financial Times—reveal a significant gap between the public American rhetoric and the actual intelligence and political realities on the ground, particularly in terms of historical ideological calculations.

The New York Times report details that while Iran is attempting to rehabilitate some facilities, there is no evidence to suggest that it has resumed uranium enrichment or is working on nuclear detonation mechanisms. This challenges the justifications provided by the Trump administration to launch a new military campaign against Iran, as the claims are based on a series of "false or unproven" allegations.

The article sheds light on the critical need for accurate and reliable information regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions, especially when military action is being contemplated. With the Trump administration's narrative under scrutiny, the implications of misinformed decisions could lead to severe geopolitical consequences, not only for the US and Iran but also for stability in the broader Middle East region.