IAEA chief says returning to Iranian sites is top priority
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi arrives for an emergency meeting of the agency's Board of Governors to discuss the situation in Iran following the U.S. attacks on the country's nuclear facilities, at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, Austria, June 23, 2025. REUTERS/Elisabeth Mandl/File Photo
VIENNA - U.N. nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi said on Wednesday his top priority is getting his inspectors back to Iran's nuclear facilities to assess the impact of U.S. and Israeli military strikes and verify its stocks of enriched uranium.
"This is the number 1 priority," International Atomic Energy Agency chief Grossi told a news conference at an Austrian security cabinet meeting. He is seeking his inspectors' return to Iranian sites including the three plants where it was enriching uranium until Israel launched strikes on June 13.
Asked if Iran had informed him of the status of its stocks of enriched uranium, particularly its uranium enriched to up to 60% purity, close to weapons grade, he pointed to a letter he received from Iran on June 13, saying Iran would take "special measures" to protect its nuclear materials and equipment.
"They did not get into details as to what that meant but clearly that was the implicit meaning of that. We can imagine this material is there," Grossi said, suggesting much of that material had survived the attacks. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Straits Times
33 minutes ago
- Straits Times
Putin will not go to BRICS summit in Brazil due to ICC arrest warrant, Kremlin aide says
FILE PHOTO: Russian President Vladimir Putin attends a meeting at the Kremlin's St. George Hall in Moscow, Russia June 23, 2025. Sputnik/Alexander Kazakov/Pool via REUTERS/ File Photo Putin will not go to BRICS summit in Brazil due to ICC arrest warrant, Kremlin aide says MOSCOW - Russian President Vladimir Putin will not travel to next week's BRICS summit in Brazil because of an outstanding arrest warrant issued against him by the International Criminal Court (ICC), Kremlin foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov said on Wednesday. The ICC issued the warrant in 2023, just over a year after Russia launched its full-scale war against Ukraine, accusing Putin of the war crime of deporting hundreds of children from Ukraine. Russia denies allegations of war crimes and the Kremlin, which did not sign the ICC's founding treaty, has dismissed the warrant as null and void. But it means that Putin needs to weigh the risk he might be arrested if he travels to another country that is a signatory to the ICC treaty. In 2023 he decided against travelling to one such country, South Africa, for a BRICS summit. But last year he was given a red carpet welcome in Mongolia, even though it is an ICC member state. Ushakov said Putin would take part via video link in the July 6-7 BRICS summit in Brazil. "This is due to certain difficulties, in the context of the ICC requirement. In that context, the Brazilian government could not take a clear position that would allow our president to participate in this meeting," Ushakov said. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov will travel to the summit to represent Russia. According to media reports, Chinese President Xi Jinping will skip the summit. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Business Times
42 minutes ago
- Business Times
A changed Middle East balance of power
ON OCT 6, 2023, it seemed as though the United States and its allies were about to win the day in the Middle East and that the anti-American Iran regime was facing a major geo-strategic blow. The expectation was that Saudi Arabia and Israel, America's two partners in the region and long-time foes of the Islamic Republic, were about to normalise diplomatic relations. The conventional wisdom in Washington and Middle Eastern capitals at that time was that the ensuing Saudi-Israeli detente would create the conditions for the formation of a new regional bloc that would include the pro-Western moderate Arab states and Israel. If that would have happened, the new bloc with US support would be able to contain Teheran and place constraints on its expansionist policies in the region as well as its plans to acquire military nuclear capability. But on Oct 7, one of Iran's regional partners, the Gaza-based Islamist Hamas, launched an attack on Israel and delivered a blow to the American strategy. Teheran had given its proxy the green light whose goal was to sabotage the Saudi-Israel detente. The attack, including the taking of Israeli hostages by Hamas, placed Israel on the defensive and led it to launch a counter-attack that has evolved into the major war between the Israelis and the forces of the Islamist Hamas. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up Joining Hamas in the attack on Israel from the north was another member of the pro-Iran regional axis – the Shiite group Hezbollah – that bombed Israeli targets, joined later on by Shiite militias in Iraq and the Houthi rebels in Yemen. The pro-Iran axis seemed to be on the move, changing the regional balance of power in favour of Teheran and sabotaging the plans to normalise diplomatic relations between Riyadh and Jerusalem. But the Israeli military response proved to be more than effective. With American support, the Israelis delivered a blow to Hamas, devastated its centres of power in Gaza and killed some of its top leaders. Similarly, Israel struck the pro-Iran Hezbollah in Lebanon, paralysed its military operations there, and like in the case of Hamas, killed its major leaders. The 'ring of fire' that Iran placed around Israel was collapsing. Things had gotten worse for the Iranians when another of their key allies, Syria's leader Bashar al Assad, was overthrown from power in December 2024. Another of Iran's surrogates ended up hitting the dust. The election of Donald Trump as US president was another piece of bad news for the Iranians. During his first term in office, President Trump embraced a pro-Israel agenda, abrogated the nuclear deal with the Iranians, and killed one of their military leaders, Qasem Soleimani. Yet, President Trump expressed a willingness to negotiate a new nuclear deal with Iran with the goal of ending its military nuclear build-up, including ending the enrichment of uranium. The Iranians calculated that post-Iraq war, the Americans would hesitate to get embroiled in yet another battle in the Middle East and would prefer to reach a diplomatic compromise with Iran. But it seemed that the negotiations with Iran were stalling, with Trump insisting that under no condition would he allow the Iranians to develop a nuclear bomb. For all practical matters, the US president was giving Iran an ultimatum and a deadline to give up its uranium enrichment programme or else. Meanwhile, Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was warning that based on Israeli intelligence, Iran was continuing to enrich its uranium and could acquire military nuclear capability within a short time. And Netanyahu, arguing that Israel needed to prevent Iran from going nuclear, launched a massive attack against the Iranians on June 13, 2025. His move amounted to a huge military and diplomatic bet. First, that the Israeli military operations would succeed in destroying Iran's major nuclear sites. And secondly, that the Americans would give Israel the green light to launch the attack. Netanyahu seemed to have won the two bets. The Israeli military operation was swift and overwhelming, and President Trump okayed the Israeli attack. In fact, the president, impressed by the Israeli military wins, was swept away in the momentum of victories, providing the Israelis with an opportunity to achieve their goal of getting the Americans to join them in the military operation in Iran. Seen in this light, Trump's decision to order a US military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities marked a clear display of American-Israeli military cooperation against Iran. He made the decision despite the major risks abroad and at home, where his political coalition was divided over the wisdom of entangling the US in another Middle East war, including the possibility of an Iranian military retaliation, which among other things could have led to a surge in the price of oil. Iran did fire 14 ballistic missiles at US troops in Qatar on Monday and announced that it destroyed the American base in retaliation for the US strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites. But the American base was already evacuated and in fact, Iran gave advance notice that the attacks were coming. President Trump mocked it as 'a very weak response', adding that Iran 'had gotten it all out of their 'system' '. Which they probably did. As a show of Iranian power or resolve, the attack failed, with Iran strongly signalling that it didn't want to fight the US, recognising that the Iranian regime risks its own survival. And after Israel aggressively targeted Iran's missile launchers and the regime's institutions, the Iranians have agreed to a ceasefire deal with the Israelis. Trump announced that Israel and Iran and Israel had agreed to a 'Complete and Total CEASEFIRE' within 24 hours and end what he called the '12-day war'. He now says that he wants 'Peace and Harmony', not a ground invasion or occupation of Iran. The bottom line is that Iran has lost its nuclear enrichment and weaponisation facilities, its leading military chiefs and nuclear scientists, much of its missile production and most of its regional proxies. The end result is the emergence of a new balance of power in the Middle East secured by an American-Israeli military and diplomatic partnership. Washington is now in a position to resuscitate the plan for normalising the Saudi and Israeli relationship, and forming an Arab-Israeli strategic bloc, and in the process to resolve the Palestinian problem and to establish an independent Palestinian state that would live side-by-side with Israel. Would the new balance of power survive? Much would depend on the Iranian and Israeli conduct and the ability of the US to secure the current ceasefire and ensure that neither Teheran nor Jerusalem would violate it. And any stable balance of power would probably require the US to put pressure on its partner, Israel, to end the war in Gaza and accept the idea of Palestinian self-determination.
CNA
an hour ago
- CNA
Iran lawmakers back suspending cooperation with UN nuclear watchdog
TEHRAN: Iranian lawmakers voted on Wednesday (Jun 25) in favour of suspending cooperation with the United Nations' nuclear watchdog, state TV said, after a 12-day war that saw Israeli and US strikes on its nuclear facilities. "The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which refused to even marginally condemn the attack on Iran's nuclear facilities, put its international credibility up for auction," Iran's parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said, according to state TV. The decision still requires the approval of the Guardian Council, a body empowered to vet legislation. Should it be ratified, Ghalibaf said "the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran will suspend its cooperation with the IAEA until the security of the nuclear facilities is guaranteed". In parliament, 221 lawmakers voted in favour and one abstained, with no votes against from those present in the 290-seat legislature, according to state TV. Lawmaker Alireza Salimi said the suspension of cooperation would mean that IAEA inspectors would be barred from accessing nuclear facilities unless they obtained the approval of Iran's top security body, the Supreme National Security Council, according to ISNA news agency. Israel launched a major bombardment campaign on Jun 13 that targeted Iranian nuclear facilities and killed top military commanders and nuclear scientists. On Sunday, Israel's ally, the United States, launched unprecedented strikes of its own on Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz, before a ceasefire was agreed on Tuesday. Lawmakers chanted "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" after the vote on Wednesday, state TV reported.
