In the wake of US strikes on three key Iranian nuclear sites (Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan) following more than a week of attacks on those and other facilities by Israel, the Iranian Parliament (Majlis) has approved suspending cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). This is subject to approval by the Supreme National Security Council, which is widely expected to be given.
Lawmakers agreed on the suspension, with 221 votes in favour, no votes against, and one abstention. According to the resolution, IAEA officials are not allowed to enter Iran for inspections unless the security of the country’s nuclear facilities and peaceful nuclear activities is guaranteed. Iran will refuse the installation of cameras on its nuclear facilities, refuse inspections, and stop submitting reports to the Agency.
Iranian authorities had previously stated that the IAEA’s failure to condemn Israel’s aggression against Iran’s facilities could lead to the termination of cooperation noting that all the facilities targeted by Israel, and subsequently by the US, were under the supervision and protection of the IAEA, which failed to prevent these attacks.
Furthermore, Iranian officials and others believe the IAEA’s actions had facilitated the attacks on its facilities. Iranian Professor of Geopolitics Abdoreza Faraji-Rad, in an article in the Tehran Times says IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, is largely responsible for the attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Faraji-Rad, who served as Iran’s ambassador to Norway and Hungary, said: “In the last two or three decades, the Islamic Republic of Iran has consistently collaborated with the IAEA. These collaborations have been influenced by the approaches, priorities, and political affiliations of the heads of this international body over different periods. Some of the agency’s directors general have attempted to act in accordance with professional and impartial principles based on their legal and technical missions, while others have deviated from impartiality due to political tastes and the preferences of certain countries.”
He adds: “However, what distinguishes Rafael Grossi among all these periods is his manner of engagement and interaction with Iran…. Grossi not only failed to maintain the prestige and legal standing of the agency but also openly deviated from the obligations and regulations of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
According to this treaty, countries engaged in peaceful nuclear activities, including enrichment, under the supervision of the agency must be protected from military attacks and threats from other countries. Even if it is assumed that a country has deviated from the agency’s regulations or is on the path to acquiring nuclear weapons, according to the agency’s legal procedures, military action against that country is not permissible; the violation must first be reported to the Board of Governors and, after examination, referred to the United Nations Security Council if necessary.
“Grossi acknowledged that he has had unprecedented cooperation with the agency and accepted the highest number of inspections during his tenure. Even in the weeks preceding Israel’s military attack on Iran, he stated that the Islamic Republic had not approached nuclear weapons. However, by presenting a comprehensive report containing troubling claims and ambiguities, he effectively paved the way for the adoption of a resolution by the IAEA Board of Governors and thereby played a decisive role in provoking the United States and Israel against Iran.”
Faraji-Rad added: “Undoubtedly, not all causes and motivations for an attack on Iran can be attributed to this report, but its significance and impact on diplomatic and security trends prior to the attack cannot be denied.”
This is a view shared by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, who noted that the report on the situation in Iran used “ambiguously negative wording”. He said that, at the IAEA headquarters, when Grossi’s report was being presented, European states “actively worked on him to ensure that he included the most ambiguously negative wording in his paper. And he did just that. A few days later, Israel launched its attacks.”
The IAEA’s latest update on the situation said Grossi “stressed the need for a resumption of the IAEA’s indispensable safeguards verification work in the country following a 12-day military conflict that severely damaged several of its nuclear sites”. In a letter to Iranian Foreign Minister Dr Abbas Araghchi, Grossi proposed a meeting. “Resuming cooperation with the IAEA is key to a successful diplomatic agreement to finally resolve the dispute over Iran’s nuclear activities. I’ve written to Foreign Minister Araghchi stressing the importance of us working together and proposing to meet soon,” he said.
According to the update: “IAEA inspectors have remained in Iran throughout the conflict and are ready to start working as soon as possible, going back to the country’s nuclear sites and verifying the inventories of nuclear material – including more than 400 kg of uranium enriched to 60% – which they last verified a few days before the Israeli air strikes began on 13 June.”
Given the unanimously adopted resolution of the Iranian Majlis, that seems to be unlikely with some Majlis members now pressing for the inspectors to be expelled and for Grossi to be banned from the country.
Conflicting damage reports
Meanwhile, there is continued confusion about the extent of the damage inflicted on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The US White House has distributed a statement from the Israel Atomic Energy Commission (IAEC), which said: “The devastating US strike on Fordow destroyed the site’s critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility inoperable.” Iran’s nuclear programme has now been set back “by many years” following US and Israeli strikes.
The same day, however, CNN reported: “The US military strikes on three of Iran’s nuclear facilities last weekend did not destroy the core components of the country’s nuclear program and likely only set it back by months, according to an early US intelligence assessment that was described by seven people briefed on it. The assessment, which has not been previously reported, was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm. It is based on a battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command in the aftermath of the US strikes, one of the sources said.”
The report continues: “The analysis of the damage to the sites and the impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear ambitions is ongoing and could change as more intelligence becomes available. But the early findings are at odds with President Donald Trump’s repeated claims that the strikes ‘completely and totally obliterated’ Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities.”
According to CNN: “Two of the people familiar with the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of the people said the centrifuges are largely ‘intact’. Another source said that the intelligence assessed enriched uranium was moved out of the sites prior to the US strikes. ‘So the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops,’ this person added.”
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNN in a statement: “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear programme. Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”
Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran (AEOI) spokesman, Behrouz Kamalvandi, said the nuclear programme will continue to expand despite attacks on its peaceful nuclear facilities. “They must understand that this industry is rooted in our nation. They cannot uproot it. Given the capabilities and potential we possess, the growth of this industry must continue. It will not be stopped.”
Iranian Vice President and head of the AEOI, Mohammad Eslami, said Tehran had taken pre-emptive measures to restore the nuclear industry. “We have taken the necessary measures to assess the damage, and recovery measures have also been taken in advance. We have a programme in place to prevent any interruptions in production and service provision.” Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran’s nuclear energy programme is “based on indigenous knowledge and cannot be eliminated by bombing”.
