
UN officials urge Israel, Iran to show ‘restraint' at emergency meeting
Israel's aerial assault on Iran has destroyed the above-ground enrichment plant at Natanz, where there is now 'contamination', according to Rafael Grossi, chief of the United Nations nuclear watchdog.
Grossi delivered the update during an emergency UN Security Council meeting in New York on Friday, where he and other senior UN officials urged both Israel and Iran to show restraint to prevent a deeper regional conflict.
'I have repeatedly stated that nuclear facilities should never be attacked regardless of the context or circumstances, as it could harm both people and the environment,' said Grossi, who heads the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
He reported radiological and chemical contamination inside the Natanz facility, where Iran was producing uranium enriched up to 60 percent. However, he added that the contamination is 'manageable with appropriate measures', and said the IAEA is ready to send nuclear security experts to help secure the sites if requested.
'I call on all parties to exercise maximum restraint to avoid further escalation,' he added.
UN Undersecretary-General for Political Affairs Rosemary DiCarlo also urged both sides to show 'maximum restraint at this critical moment'.
'A peaceful resolution through negotiations remains the best means to ensure the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programme,' she told the council. 'We must at all costs avoid a growing conflagration which would have enormous global consequences.'
The 15-member Security Council, also joined by representatives of Israel and Iran, met at Iran's request after Israel struck several Iranian nuclear facilities and military sites in the early hours of Friday, and carried out assassinations of senior military officials and nuclear scientists.
Iran's UN Envoy Amir Saeid Iravani told the emergency meeting that the attacks, which he described as a 'declaration of war' and 'a direct assault on international order', had killed 78 people and injured more than 320.
He accused the US of providing Israel with both intelligence and political support for the attacks, the consequences of which he said it 'shares full responsibility' for.
'Supporting Israel today is supporting war crimes,' he said.
The US representative, McCoy Pitt, insisted the US was not involved militarily in the strikes, but defended them as necessary for the self-defence of Israel.
He warned that the 'consequences for Iran would be dire' if it targeted US bases or citizens in retaliation. 'Iran's leadership would be wise to negotiate at this time,' he said.
Israel's UN envoy Danny Danon cast its attack on Iran's nuclear sites as 'an act of national preservation', claiming Iran was days away from producing enough fissile material for multiple bombs.
'This operation was carried out because the alternative was unthinkable,' said Danon. 'How long did the world expect us to wait? Until they assemble the bomb? Until they mount it on a Shahab missile? Until it is en route to Tel Aviv or Jerusalem?'
'We will not hesitate, we will not relent, and we will not allow a genocidal regime to endanger our people,' said Danon
An Iranian counterattack on Israel took place while the UN meeting was in progress, with Iran firing waves of ballistic missiles at Israeli targets.
'Iran affirms its inherent right to self-defence,' said Iran's Iravani, promising to respond 'decisively and proportionately' against Israel.
'This is not a threat, this is the natural, legal and necessary consequence of an unprovoked military act,' he said.
Vassily Nebenzia, Russia's UN ambassador, told the council Israel's actions in the Middle East are 'pushing the region to a large-scale nuclear catastrophe'.
'This completely unprovoked attack, no matter what Israel says to the contrary, is a gross violation of the UN Charter and international law,' he said.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Al Jazeera
26 minutes ago
- Al Jazeera
Israeli air attack on Mashhad airport in Iran
NewsFeed Israeli air attack on Mashhad airport in Iran Videos show fire and thick plumes of smoke rising from Mashhad Hashemi Nejad airport in eastern Iran following an Israeli missile attack. Israel claims it targeted an Iranian refuelling plane. It would be the furthest strike since the start of the military operation, at a distance of approximately 2,300km.


Al Jazeera
an hour ago
- Al Jazeera
Will Russia, Turkiye and China provide support to Iran in its conflict?
It is a conflict that has the potential to ignite the entire Middle East. Israel has been attacking Iran, saying Tehran's nuclear programme poses an existential threat. Iran, for its part, has responded with a barrage of retaliatory attacks. But now, what role can the global community play? China, Russia and Turkiye have condemned Israel's actions. Beijing and Moscow maintain economic and political ties with both Iran and Israel. So, what, if anything, can these powers do to end the conflict? And is there a shift in dynamics in the region? Presenter: Adrian Finighan Guests: Barin Kayaoglu – Chair and assistant professor of American studies at the Social Sciences University of Ankara Glenn Carle – Former CIA officer and deputy national intelligence officer for Transnational Threats at the National Intelligence Council Nikolay Surkov – Assistant professor at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations


Al Jazeera
2 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Israel has learned no lessons from Iraq
Tel Aviv's decision to launch a new war against Iran on June 13 is a disaster in the making. No one will benefit, including the Israeli government, and many will suffer. The exchange of fire has already resulted in at least 80 people killed in Iran and 10 in Israel. It is tragically clear that the lessons of past failed military adventurism in the region have been entirely ignored. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has branded the war as 'pre-emptive', aimed at preventing Tehran from developing its own nuclear weapon. In doing so, he has repeated the strategic blunder of the last two politicians to launch an alleged 'pre-emptive' attack in the region, US President George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair. As Israeli jets and missiles streaked across the Middle East's skies and carried out their deadly strikes against Iranian military sites and military leaders, they immediately made the world a far more dangerous place. Just like the US-British invasion of Iraq, this unprovoked attack is set to bring more instability to an already volatile region. Netanyahu claimed that the attacks were meant to devastate Iran's nuclear capabilities. So far, the Israeli army has hit three nuclear facilities, Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow, causing various levels of damage. However, it is unlikely that these strikes will actually put a stop to the Iranian nuclear programme, and the Israeli prime minister knows it. The Iranian authorities have intentionally built the Natanz site deep underground so that it is impervious to all but the strongest bunker-busting bombs. Tel Aviv lacks the capability to permanently destroy it because it does not have the Massive Ordnance Penetrator or the Massive Ordnance Air Blast bombs that are produced by the United States. Washington has long refused to provide these, even under the administration of US President Donald Trump, which has coddled Israeli officials and sought to shield them from sanctions over their war crimes in the Gaza Strip. Trump's team has recently indicated again that it would not supply these arms to Tel Aviv. From US official reactions after the attack, it is not entirely clear to what extent Washington was informed. The US State Department initially distanced the US from the initial attacks, labelling them a 'unilateral' Israeli operation. Shortly after, Trump claimed that he was fully informed. The extent of US involvement – and approval – for the attack remains a major question, but it immediately ended any hopes that its intense diplomacy with Tehran over its nuclear programme in recent weeks would result in a new deal, which is a short-term win for Netanyahu. But further action against Iran appears dependent on bringing the US into the conflict. That is a huge gamble for Tel Aviv given the number of critics of US interventionism among the top ranks of Trump's advisers. The US president himself has attempted to make reversing US interventionism a key part of his legacy. Israel's actions are already harming Trump's other interests by pushing global oil prices up and complicating his relations with the Gulf states that have much to lose if the conflict disrupts shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. If Israel looks like it is winning, Trump will undoubtedly claim it as his own victory. But if Netanyahu's strategy increasingly depends on trying to drag Washington into another Middle Eastern war, he may well lash out against him. As things stand now, unless Israel decides to breach international norms and use a nuclear weapon, making any further strategic achievements in Iran would indeed depend on the US. Netanyahu's second declared goal – overthrowing the Iranian regime – also seems out of reach. A number of senior military commanders have been killed in targeted attacks, while Tel Aviv has openly called on the Iranian people to rise up against their government. But Israel's unilateral aggression is likely to bring far more anger towards Tel Aviv among Iranians than it will against their own government, regardless of how undemocratic it may be. In fact, Iranian regime assertions that a nuclear bomb is a needed deterrent against Israeli aggression now will appear more logical to those who doubted it domestically. And in other regional countries where Tehran's interests had been retreating, Netanyahu's actions risk breathing new life into these alliances. But even if Israel succeeds in destabilising Tehran, it will not bring about regional peace. This is the lesson that should have been learned from the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. The collapse of the Iraqi state in the aftermath led to a major rise in extremism and ultimately to the establishment of ISIL (ISIS) that terrorised so much of the region in the 2010s. Israel has no chance of instituting a smooth transfer of power to a more pliant regime in Tehran. Occupying Iran to try to do so is out of the question given that the two countries do not share a border. US support for such an effort is also hard to imagine under the Trump administration because doing so would be sure to increase the risk of attacks against the US. In other words, Netanyahu's attacks may bring short-term tactical gains for Israel in delaying Iran's nuclear ambitions and thwarting talks with the US, but they promise a long-term strategic disaster. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.