Iran expected to step up nuclear secrecy after US strikes
President Donald Trump said his administration 'successfully' struck three nuclear sites – Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan – in Iran on Sunday, although the extent of the damage remains unclear. The attacks followed Israeli strikes across Iran aimed at destroying its nuclear capabilities over 12 days.
Iran retaliated by striking key areas in Israel, while blaming the International Atomic Energy Agency for fuelling unease about its nuclear activities. An Iranian bill to suspend co-operation with the IAEA moved closer to passage on Thursday.
A ceasefire was agreed upon early on Tuesday, ending the exchanges that killed hundreds of people and caused extensive damage. However, questions remain on how badly Iran's nuclear activities have been set back.
'Air strikes haven't destroyed all of Iran's nuclear programme, and if anything, they have reinvigorated a desire to be more secretive on their nuclear programme,' said Dina Esfandiary, a Middle East expert at Bloomberg Geoeconomics.
'That's not to say that they're going to dash for the bomb, but many people in Iran are calling for that,' she told The National.
A leaked US Defence Intelligence Agency assessment has suggested the core components of Iran's nuclear programme have not been destroyed and the strikes only set back Iran's efforts by months rather than years.
But that is only an initial assessment, and is labelled as 'low confidence' because it is early in the process of trying to understand what happened.
On June 13. Israel attacked Iranian nuclear facilities and targeted top military commanders and scientists. More than a dozen were killed. That was followed by the US attack that hit the nuclear sites with 'bunker-buster' bombs.
'Despite the elimination of senior defence figures and nuclear experts, the regime still possesses the technical expertise necessary to develop a nuclear weapon,' Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East programme at London's Chatham House, said.
She said it is likely that 'Iran relocated sensitive nuclear materials from prominent locations such as the Fordow facility before the assault. The scope of the damage remains uncertain.'
'Therefore, a long-term resolution to the nuclear challenge will ultimately require a diplomatic approach,' Ms Vakil told The National.
Iranian hostility towards IAEA
The UN watchdog is requesting access to some of Iran's major nuclear facilities now that the war is over, but it is highly unlikely that Tehran will allow it, Ms Esfandiary said.
IAEA inspectors have remained in Iran throughout the conflict and are ready to start work as soon as possible, going back to the country's nuclear sites and verifying the inventories of nuclear material, the agency's director Rafael Grossi said.
Iran's parliament approved a bill on Wednesday to suspend co-operation with the IAEA.
The decision was approved on Thursday by the Guardian Council, a panel of clerics and jurists that vets legislation. The National has contacted the IAEA for a comment.
'Iran is taking a hostile posture towards the IAEA with its vote in parliament as a prelude to negotiations,' Ms Vakil said.
Iran has long denied any intention of building a nuclear bomb and it insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.
'The Iran-Israel war has further negatively affected Iran's relationship with the IAEA,' Farzan Sabet, managing researcher at the Geneva Graduate Institute, said. 'Tehran historically has had its suspicions of the IAEA and raised questions about its impartiality.
'Tehran will be suspicious about the extent to which the IAEA was used both by the Americans, the Israelis and other western intelligence to infiltrate its nuclear programme and gain knowledge that was then used to conduct strikes on Iranian facilities,' Mr Sabet told The National.
Before the Israeli strikes, the IAEA board had passed a resolution declaring that Tehran was breaching its non-proliferation obligations, which triggered objections from Iran. Since the start of the war, Iranian officials have criticised the agency for failing to condemn the Israeli attacks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Washington is ceding its firm leadership on Ukraine in favour of a tripolar dynamic
This week's White House meetings on the Ukraine war have demonstrated how drastically the world has changed. The US president wants to broker a deal that ends the fighting but doesn't seem overly concerned about the details. As long as Donald Trump can claim the status of international peacemaker and perhaps win a much-coveted Nobel Peace Prize, he will probably be satisfied. It's unmistakable political theatre. Until now, in any such situation, there would be two camps: Russia versus a US-led western front backing Ukraine. But US policy has become so unrecognisable that there are now instead three poles – Russia, the US, and Ukraine backed by Europe – creating a triangle with Washington as the hypotenuse. That means valuable European leverage and energy that could be used to pressure Russia is being diverted to prevent the US president from abandoning Ukraine, Europe, Nato and traditional US national security doctrines. They're succeeding on that thus far, but there's no progress towards ending the conflict. Russian President Vladimir Putin appears happy to continue talks with the fighting ongoing, confident his far more numerous forces can wear down the Ukrainian military. He's concentrating on shifting Mr Trump's attention and rhetoric away from demands for an immediate ceasefire, with some apparent success. Mr Trump is instead focused on triangular talks between the three sides. Were this summit to take place, it could have a questionable outcome because neither party may be willing to make concessions to the other. They will only make concessions, if at all, to third parties such as the US or Europeans. It's difficult to imagine a positive result emerging from a trilateral meeting while negative scenarios abound. Were this summit to take place, it could have a questionable outcome because neither party may be willing to make concessions to the other The sensible approach would be what has been, not entirely unsuccessfully, pursued between Israel and Hamas, with third party negotiators talking to both delegations. But proximity talks between professional diplomats is box office poison. To Mr Trump – once a highly experienced and skilful television producer – a three-way summit may sound like a potential blockbuster. The cast is perfect if they play their roles together in person, and numerous readily available settings, such as the White House or a similar venue in Western Europe, would be a perfect backdrop for a magnificent peace-making spectacle. But it's hard to see how the Ukrainian and Russian positions can be bridged without a major change in the military and strategic equation on the ground. One side will have to essentially win. It's not impossible to imagine a ceasefire or even armistice in which Ukraine refuses to formally cede any land but that leaves parts of it in Russian hands. But even this bitter struggle over land isn't the core of the conflict. Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022 with the confident expectation of establishing its own governing authority in Kyiv and eliminating Ukraine's increasingly western-oriented state and society it found profoundly threatening. Ukraine, democratising despite rampant corruption, was even a 'bad example' to Russians about their own political alternatives. Certainly, Russia may want to annex Ukrainian territory, now packaged as potential 'land swaps'. But what it really wants is to ensure that Ukraine doesn't integrate further into the West creating, from Mr Putin's perspective, an intolerable threat to Russia along much of its western border. But greater integration into the West and Europe is precisely what Ukraine intends. These two positions are clearly irreconcilable and far more significant than the land deal on which Mr Trump seems focused. Potential US or western 'security guarantees' for Ukraine cut precisely to the point. Ukraine already received guarantees from the west, and Russia itself, in their denuclearisation agreements between 1991–1994. None of this protected Ukraine from Russia in 2014 or 2022. The closest thing to a reliable guarantee would be for Ukraine to join Nato, the ultimate Russian red line. Mr Trump's negotiator, Steve Witkoff, spoke about the potential for new guarantees that would mimic Article 5 of the Nato treaty that is commonly interpreted to commit the US and other signatories to militarily defending any Nato member that comes under attack. It would effectively throw an American and European nuclear umbrella over Ukraine. Unfortunately, Mr Trump has indicated several times that not only is he highly suspicious of Nato in general, he does not accept that Article 5 commits the US to defending anyone. Indeed, the Article was originally crafted to allow isolationist Americans to read it in this manner, although this has never been a White House perspective until now. This conflict is simultaneously simple yet profound. Ukraine wants to be independent, increasingly democratic and gradually join the EU and possibly even Nato. It sees its future as shaped by an identity that looks West rather than East. For Russia, all of that is simply unacceptable. That leaves Mr Trump seeking an agreement he probably can't get, especially if he allows Mr Putin to keep steering him away from the necessity for an immediate ceasefire. Russia can continue to wear down Ukraine on the battlefield, although a resumption of robust US military aid might eventually make that prohibitively costly. Mr Putin wants time to press for additional advantage, while Ukraine needs all the help it can get. Ukraine still has rational hopes that even under Mr Trump, Washington will eventually resume backing its resistance to Moscow. But Mr Putin appears to skilfully be playing for time, equally rationally confident that his larger forces can wear the Ukrainians down, especially without US military aid. We clearly see the extraordinary transformation of the global strategic landscape. What ought to be two sides is now three, with the US appearing to no longer lead, or even participate in, a western alliance defending Ukraine. The 2022 Russian invasion may well be remembered as the turning point to a new era in international relations in which, for a time at least, whatever rules once existed are gone, and only might makes right. Under Mr Trump, Washington seems perfectly OK with that.
Arabian Business
5 hours ago
- Arabian Business
Kuwait to attract $32bn investment and create 50,000 jobs under New Kuwait 2035 mega projects
Kuwait is rolling out one of its most ambitious development drives to date, with plans to attract up to KD10bn ($32.6bn) in private and foreign investment, generate annual revenues of KD1bn ($3.26bn) by 2030, and create more than 50,000 new jobs. The programme is anchored in the New Kuwait 2035 Vision and combines sweeping reforms, strategic partnerships, and mega projects in energy, transport, infrastructure, smart cities, and industrial zones. The government says the strategy will also reduce pressure on the state budget by around 30 per cent while strengthening long-term economic sustainability. Kuwait megaprojects Integrated government action — linking economic diplomacy with global partners and supported by new regulatory frameworks — is driving this transformation, which aims to boost transparency, accelerate project delivery, and diversify national income sources. A Ministerial Committee for Monitoring Agreements with China has held 22 meetings to fast-track projects and remove obstacles. Progress has already been made on the Mubarak Al Kabeer Port project, with the execution contract signed in March. Environmental cooperation includes afforestation programmes, ecosystem rehabilitation, and land reclamation. Kuwait has also elevated its historic ties with Japan to a comprehensive strategic partnership, expanding cooperation across trade, investment, renewable energy, and petrochemicals. Major power and infrastructure projects Among the largest projects under way are the second and third phases of the Al Zour North Power Plant, designed to meet rising demand for power and water. The project encourages private sector participation to cut costs, accelerate completion, and optimise resource use — reflecting the government's broader push to integrate private capital into infrastructure development. Kuwait's 2025–26 development plan, approved in March, includes 124 projects: 69 under ministries, 21 with affiliated entities, and 34 with independent institutions, making it one of the country's most ambitious pipelines. Reforms to boost investment The government has rolled out wide-ranging reforms, including: A new real estate brokerage system A smart licensing project Amendments to the Companies Law A taxation framework for multinational groups Launch of the Real Estate Developer System Kuwait has also advanced the third phase of its Capital Market Development Program, a key step toward upgrading to advanced emerging market status and boosting investor confidence. Global institutions lift outlook The World Bank projects Kuwait's economy will rebound to 2.2 per cent in 2025, driven by infrastructure projects, OPEC+ production adjustments, and non-oil sector growth. Growth is forecast to stabilise at 2.7 per cent between 2026–27. S&P Global Ratings expects continued growth supported by reforms, while EFG Hermes highlighted improved decision-making and raised its forecast for banking sector expansion starting from 2026. Leadership commitment Prime Minister Sheikh Ahmad Abdullah Al Ahmad Al Sabah said positive economic indicators and rising foreign investment confirm the government's determination to deliver on its development goals. He stressed that the progress reflects the vision of the Amir Sheikh Meshal Al Ahmad Al Jaber Al Sabah, adding that the reforms and mega projects will reinforce Kuwait's position as a regional investment hub.
The National
6 hours ago
- The National
Trump to increase scrutiny of 55 million visa holders in search for breaches
The administration of President Donald Trump is increasing its efforts to scrutinise and possibly deport US visa holders who it considers to be in violation of immigration rules. What the Trump White House determines to be a breach, however, is likely to cause a lot of concern and probably legal action. The US State Department says it will review the records of about 55 million foreigners holding US visas, a report from AP said. It will look closely for any signs of ineligibility, such as overstaying, criminal activity, threats to public safety, engaging in any form of terrorist activity, or providing support to a terrorist organisation. Since taking office for his second term in January, Mr Trump has pushed to arrest and deport those holding student visas who have taken part in demonstrations supporting the rights of Palestinians amid the Israel-Gaza war. Many of those moves have come under legal scrutiny, ending in several losses for the Trump administration. Last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio defended a decision to suspend visitor visas for Gazans – even those seeking medical treatment after being injured in Israel's war on the enclave – which was made after inquiries from members of Congress. Mr Rubio told CBS on Sunday that the State Department was warned by politicians that some of the non-government organisations assisting Gazans with the visas had connections to Hamas. The recent move from the State Department is a significant escalation from the stance at Mr Trump's 2024 campaign rallies. There have also been reports that the State Department will be using AI to potentially revoke visas, adding to concern that such a vast undertaking could overlook nuance and context that many legal experts consider to be necessary.
