Iran carried out implosion tests for nuclear weapons development, IAEA reports
A new IAEA report reveals Iran carried out undeclared nuclear tests, prompting calls to refer the case to the UN Security Council. Much of the IAEA report is based on evidence from the Mossad.
The recent special International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report on Iranian nuclear violations added many points, one being that Iran carried out multiple implosion tests, a key military skill necessary for developing the atomic bomb. Implosion tests do not have civilian nuclear uses.
Notably, though much of the report refers to Iranian military activities from 20 years ago, Tehran's careful record-keeping means that any progress that the Islamic Republic made back then could be used to help with a more sudden, rapid push for a breakthrough to a nuclear weapon in 2025.
The fact that it carried out various explosive tests also suggests that Iran is further along in other skills needed for developing a nuclear bomb, besides just enriching uranium, than many observers may have thought.
This and multiple other findings are analyzed in detail in a position paper introduced this weekend by the Institute for Science and International Security, spearheaded by lead author and president David Albright.
According to the think tank, the IAEA Board of Governors must refer Tehran's nuclear violations to the UN Security Council during its meeting, which opens on Monday and runs until June 13.
All of this is occurring as the Islamic Republic and the US are the closest they have been to a new nuclear deal in years, but also not far from a possible collapse in the talks, which could lead to an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities. In a more detailed analysis of the IAEA report, the think tank said that the agency discloses its assessment 'that Iran tested neutron initiators produced at Lavizan-Shian and cites specific dates, but notably, it does not mention a location.' Albright wrote that the IAEA report said instead that 'the EDNS [explosively driven neutron sources] produced at Lavizan-Shian were small-scale, designed for testing, and integrated into scaled implosion systems. [They were] tested on at least two occasions (on February 15 and July 3, 2003).'
Next, the May 2025 report also stated anew that the IAEA found indications that 'equipment was developed and tested at Lavizan-Shian that included neutron detectors and housings' and that 'an identical housing for neutron detectors was deployed in an explosive test at Marivan on April 15, 2003.'
Further, the IAEA report provided new information about the equipment and materials that were present at Varamin, saying, 'This equipment contained all of the essential equipment for a uranium conversion facility, including small but heavily contaminated (and possibly full) UF6 Cylinders, uranium extractants (such as tributyl phosphate (TBP), uranium extraction and conversion hardware, fluorine-based chemicals (hydrofluoric acid (HF) and potassium difluoride (KHF2), and radiation monitoring equipment.'
Moreover, the IAEA said that in sorting the material and equipment and placing it into containers, Iran categorized the items as either 'essential' or 'nonessential.'
This resulted in five containers being deemed 'essential' and eight containers being categorized as 'nonessential.' 'The operators of Varamin' also took into account the level of contamination with nuclear material and that one of the containers considered 'essential' was categorized as being 'the highest level of contamination,' containing 'small UF6 Cylinders and other 'special materials,'' according to Albright.
The report also concludes that Lavizan-Shian, Marivan, and Varamin, as well as 'other possible related locations,' were 'part of an undeclared structured nuclear program.'
It added that Iran retained nuclear material or related equipment from this program at Turquzabad from 2009 to 2018. The whereabouts of these resources is currently unknown.
The IAEA also discussed and connected these activities to the missing amount of uranium that was once present at Iran's Jaber Ibn Hayan Multipurpose Laboratory (JHL).
Also, Albright wrote that for the first time, 'the IAEA revealed its assessment that the four sites and missing nuclear material in Iran are directly connected.'
Moreover, the think tank said that the report provided new information on the extent of Iranian attempts to sanitize locations of interest to the IAEA and provide false information when faced with questions.
It stated that 'the provision of inaccurate and sometimes contradictory explanations seriously obstructed' the IAEA's efforts.
The atomic watchdog agency said explicitly that although the matters on Lavizan-Shian and Marivan were 'no longer outstanding,' this did not mean the issues were 'resolved.'
Much of the IAEA report originated from evidence brought to it by the Mossad, which seized Iran's nuclear archives in 2018.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
21 minutes ago
- CNN
How Kurdistan is rebranding itself
CNN speaks to Masrour Barzani, Prime Minister of Kurdistan Regional Government, to discuss how it is positioning itself as not just a gateway to Iraq but also a destination in its own right.
Associated Press
32 minutes ago
- Associated Press
Iran says it executed 9 Islamic State group militants detained after a 2018 attack
Updated [hour]:[minute] [AMPM] [timezone], [monthFull] [day], [year] DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Iran says it executed nine militants of the Islamic State group detained after a 2018 attack. The Iranian judiciary's Mizan news agency announced the executions Tuesday. It described the militants as being detained after they were involved in a clash with Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard in which three troops were killed.
Associated Press
32 minutes ago
- Associated Press
What to know about South Korea's approval of new probes into ousted leader Yoon
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — Just a week into his term in office, South Korea's new liberal President Lee Jae-myung moved against his ousted conservative predecessor, approving legislation to launch sweeping special investigations into Yoon Suk Yeol's ill-fated imposition of martial law in December as well as criminal allegations surrounding his wife and administration. The monthslong probes, which will involve hundreds of investigators under special prosecutors appointed by Lee, could dominate his early agenda and inflame tensions with conservatives, as Yoon already faces an explosive rebellion trial carrying a possible death sentence. Here's a look at the bills approved at Tuesday's Cabinet meeting, which Lee is expected to sign into law soon. What the investigations are about The three bills, overwhelmingly passed last week by the liberal-led legislature, call for independent investigations into Yoon's hourslong martial law debacle; corruption and financial crime allegations against his wife; and the 2023 drowning death of a marine during a flood rescue operation, an incident Lee's Democratic Party says Yoon's government tried to cover up. Earlier versions of the bills were rejected nine different times both by Yoon and by the caretaker government that took over following his impeachment on Dec. 14. Lee, who won last week's snap election triggered by Yoon's formal removal from office in April, ran on a platform of unity, promising not to target conservatives out of spite and vowing to ease political polarization. However, Lee called for deeper investigations into Yoon's martial law enactment and allegations involving his wife, citing public demands for accountability. For each of the three investigations, Lee will appoint a special prosecutor from two candidates nominated by his Democratic Party and a smaller liberal ally. The main conservative People Power Party, whose members largely boycotted last week's National Assembly votes, denounced the laws for excluding them from the nomination process. Liberal lawmakers justified the move, citing the conservatives' alleged ties to matters that will be investigated. More than 570 investigators, including some 120 public prosecutors, can be assigned to assist with the inquiries. The special prosecutors are expected to be nominated and appointed in coming weeks, potentially allowing the investigations to begin as early as July. Kang Yu-jung, Lee's spokesperson, said the Cabinet's approval of the bills reflects public demands to 'seek accountability for the rebellion attempt and restore constitutional order.' 'It also carries the meaning of recovering the National Assembly's legislative authority, which had been repeatedly blocked by presidential vetoes,' she said. Why the investigations can be explosive Public prosecutors in Seoul already indicted Yoon in January on charges of masterminding a rebellion and enacting martial law as an illegal bid to seize the legislature and election offices and arrest political opponents. Liberals insisted independent investigations into Yoon are still essential, saying probes by prosecutors, police and an anti-corruption agency were inadequate and hampered by Yoon's refusal to cooperate. Yoon's case will now likely be transferred to the special prosecutor, who will be authorized to expand the existing investigation, including whether he and senior military leaders deliberately sought to provoke North Korea in order to create a crisis that could justify declaring martial law at home. Yoon's martial law decree on Dec. 3, which lasted only hours after a quorum of lawmakers pushed past a blockade of hundreds of heavily armed soldiers to revoke it, came amid heightened inter-Korean tensions, marked by monthslong North Korean flights of trash-laden balloons and South Korean loudspeaker broadcasts at the border. The special prosecutor could also expand the investigation to include PPP lawmakers over suspicions that party leaders tried to obstruct the vote to lift Yoon's martial law, by directing lawmakers to attend an emergency party meeting, instead of the main chamber session. This is almost certain to provoke a fierce reaction from conservatives, already in disarray after Yoon's self-inflicted political downfall. Yoon's wife, Kim Keon Hee, faces multiple corruption allegations, including claims that she received luxury items from a Unification Church official seeking business favors, as well as possible involvement in a stock price manipulation scheme. Kim is also suspected of interfering with PPP candidate nominations ahead of legislative elections in April last year, but has yet to be summoned by law enforcement authorities. While in office, Yoon repeatedly dismissed calls to investigate his wife, denouncing them as baseless political attacks. What's happening with Lee's own legal troubles PPP leaders accuse Lee's government of using its legislative majority to target conservatives – and also shield the presidency from Lee's own legal troubles. Lee faced five separate trials on corruption and other charges, but in three cases where hearings had begun, the courts postponed proceedings until after the election. While South Korea's constitution prevents a sitting president from being prosecuted for most crimes aside from rebellion and treason, it does not clearly state whether that protection extends to criminal charges filed before taking office, leaving room for judicial interpretation. The Democrats, who hold 170 of the 300 National Assembly seats, are pushing to revise the criminal procedure law to suspend all ongoing criminal trials involving a sitting president until the end of their terms – a move PPP leader Kim Yong-tae called a 'distorted' attempt to 'bulletproof' Lee's presidency. 'Becoming president does not erase (Lee's) crimes. Suspending trials do not make the crimes disappear,' Kim said Tuesday, calling for the Democrats to scrap the bill. 'This would be a declaration that power would stand above the law.' Two different courts this week handling Lee's cases — on allegations of violating election laws and granting illicit favors to private investors during dubious development projects while he was mayor of Seongnam — decided to suspend the trials indefinitely, citing their interpretations of the constitution.
