The MOAB and Its Intended Targets
The United States is considering deploying its most powerful non-nuclear weapon against Iran if President Donald Trump decides to resume major combat operations in a war that has reached a bloody stalemate, according to a CNN report citing multiple US officials familiar with the planning. The GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb, better known as the “Mother of All Bombs,” or MOAB has been included in military strike options targeting Iranian energy infrastructure and nuclear facilities, including the suspected underground site at Pickaxe Mountain.
The plans could be activated before or after the upcoming US midterm elections, with one source indicating the strikes could take place before a US military withdrawal from the Central Command area of responsibility, potentially allowing the administration to launch further attacks before declaring victory and pulling out. The proposed deployment of the MOAB would mark a significant escalation in the six-month conflict, which began with US-Israeli strikes on Iran in February and has since claimed thousands of lives across the region.
What the MOAB Can and Cannot Do
The MOAB is a 9.8 ton behemoth, measuring 30 feet in length with a diameter of 3.4 feet and carrying approximately 8,500 kilograms of H-6 high explosives. Its blast is equivalent to 11 tons of TNT, with a radius of severe effects reaching approximately 140 meters and partial destruction extending up to two kilometers from the epicentre. The GPS guided bomb can devastate an area equivalent to roughly nine city blocks, making it an ideal weapon for clearing large areas and destroying surface infrastructure.
However, military experts have raised serious doubts about its effectiveness against Iran’s most critical assets. “The MOAB is a massive information operation type weapon that is great for huge area clearance but not much else,” a source familiar with the military planning told CNN. “It is definitely not designed as a deep penetration warhead”. Iran’s nuclear facilities, including Fordow and Pickaxe Mountain, are buried deep underground and protected by thick layers of granite and reinforced concrete, fortifications that the MOAB, with its air blast design, simply cannot penetrate.
The Weapon Built for the Job That Isn’t Being Used
The United States possesses a weapon specifically engineered to destroy deeply buried targets: the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). Weighing over 13 tons and carried by B-2 stealth bombers, the MOP is designed to penetrate thick layers of concrete and rock before detonating, with the capability to reach targets buried as deep as 18 meters of reinforced concrete or over 50 meters of rock. The MOP can be deployed by stealth aircraft rather than conventional transport planes, allowing it to operate in contested airspace.
Yet despite the MOP’s suitability for the mission of destroying Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, the Trump administration appears to be considering the MOAB instead, a weapon that, by the admission of officials familiar with the planning, is likely to fail against the very targets it is being considered for. This discrepancy has raised questions about whether the consideration of the MOAB is a genuine military strategy or a psychological operation designed to project strength without achieving substantive military objectives.
Delivery Challenges in Iranian Airspace
Even if the MOAB were deemed effective against its intended targets, delivering it to Iranian territory would present enormous challenges. The bomb’s size and weight, 22,600 pounds, prevent standard fighter jets and even stealth bombers from carrying it. It must be transported by a military transport aircraft, such as the MC-130J used in Afghanistan in 2017. Such aircraft would face substantial risks when operating in airspace protected by Iran’s advanced air defence systems, which have already demonstrated their capability to target US assets throughout the conflict.
The need to drop the MOAB from a slow-moving transport plane in non contested airspace means that any mission involving the weapon would require the US to first achieve air superiority over the target area, a costly and potentially prolonged undertaking that could expose American forces to significant danger.
Civilian Casualties
The MOAB’s enormous blast radius, capable of devastating nine city blocks raises concerns about civilian casualties, particularly if strikes target energy infrastructure near populated areas. Iran’s energy facilities, including refineries and oil distribution networks, are often located in or near urban centres. The use of such a weapon in these environments would inevitably result in mass civilian casualties, a prospect that has alarmed human rights organisations and legal experts. The Pentagon conducted a study in 2003 to determine whether the MOAB complied with the Law of Armed Conflict, concluding that “although the MOAB weapon leaves a large footprint, it is discriminate and requires a deliberate launching toward the target”.
But this assessment assumed the weapon would be used in sparsely populated areas, as it was in Afghanistan in 2017, when it was dropped on an ISIS tunnel complex in a barren mountainous region. Using it against infrastructure near Iranian cities would be a different matter entirely, and the legal and moral implications of such an action would be profound.
The Afghanistan Precedent and Its Limits
The only combat use of the MOAB occurred on April 13, 2017, when the US dropped it on a tunnel complex used by ISIS militants in Afghanistan’s Nangarhar province. The strike killed between 36 and 90 militants and destroyed a 300 meter long network of tunnels and caves. The mission was considered a success because the target was a confined, above-ground tunnel network in a remote area with no civilians present. The US military monitored the site for days before the strike to confirm the absence of civilians.
But that success does not translate to the Iranian context. Iran’s nuclear and energy infrastructure is dispersed across a vast country, deeply buried, and often located near population centres. A MOAB strike against such targets would likely be both militarily ineffective and politically catastrophic, potentially killing hundreds of civilians and galvanising Iranian resistance at a time when Tehran has already demonstrated its willingness to absorb punishment and continue fighting.
A Psychological Weapon
Ultimately, the MOAB’s primary value may be psychological rather than military. The bomb was originally conceived in 2003 as a weapon designed to “scare an adversary into surrendering” by demonstrating the overwhelming destructive power of the US arsenal. Its use in Afghanistan was as much a message to ISIS and other adversaries as it was a tactical operation. In the context of the US Iran war, the consideration of the MOAB may be an attempt by the Trump administration to project resolve and pressure Tehran into concessions without committing to a full scale ground invasion or the use of even more controversial weapons.
What Lies Ahead
The US military has reportedly developed a range of strike options for the president, from lower intensity operations to more powerful strikes against heavily fortified targets. The MOAB represents the highest rung on that ladder short of nuclear weapons. Whether Trump decides to use it remains uncertain, but the mere consideration of the weapon shows that the United States is prepared to escalate dramatically if the war continues. For Iran, the response is likely to be defiant. Tehran has repeatedly stated that it will not bow to military pressure and that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes, a claim that Washington and Tel Aviv have long dismissed. The coming weeks will reveal whether the MOAB is used.