Iran has increased stockpile of highly enriched uranium, watchdog reveals
Iran
has increased its stockpile of uranium enriched to near weapons-grade levels, a confidential report by the
UN
nuclear watchdog said.
The report comes at a sensitive time as Tehran and Washington have been holding several rounds of talks over a possible nuclear deal that US president
Donald Trump
is trying to reach.
The report by the Vienna-based
International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA)– which was seen by the Associated Press – says that as of May 17th, Iran has amassed 408.6kg of uranium enriched up to 60 per cent. That is an increase of 133.8kg since the IAEA's last report in February.
That material is a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90 per cent. A report in February put the stockpile at 274.8kg.
READ MORE
IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi has stressed repeatedly that 'Iran is the only non-nuclear weapon state enriching to this level'.
On Saturday Mr Grossi said he 'reiterates his urgent call upon Iran to co-operate fully and effectively' with the IAEA.
On Thursday senior Iranian officials dismissed speculation about an imminent nuclear deal with the United States, emphasising that any agreement must fully lift sanctions and allow the country's nuclear programme to continue.
The comments came a day after Mr Trump said he has told Israeli prime minister
Binyamin Netanyahu
to hold off on striking Iran to give the US administration more time to push for a new nuclear deal with Tehran.
Mr Trump said on Friday that he still thinks a deal could be completed in the 'not too distant future'.
[
Iran will survive if nuclear deal not agreed with US, says president
Opens in new window
]
'They don't want to be blown up. They would rather make a deal,' Mr Trump said of Iran. He said: 'That would be a great thing that we could have a deal without bombs being dropped all over the Middle East.'
US intelligence agencies assess that Iran has yet to begin a weapons programme but has 'undertaken activities that better position it to produce a nuclear device, if it chooses to do so'.
Israel said Saturday's report was a clear warning sign that 'Iran is totally determined to complete its nuclear weapons programme', according to a statement from Mr Netanyahu's office.
It said the IAEA's report 'strongly reinforces what Israel has been saying for years – the purpose of Iran's nuclear programme is not peaceful'.
It also said Iran's level of enrichment 'has no civilian justification whatsoever' and appealed for the international community to 'act now to stop Iran'.
The IAEA also circulated to member states on Saturday a second, 22-page confidential report, also seen by the AP, that Mr Grossi requested following a resolution passed by the 35-member IAEA board of governors last November.
[
As Trump seeks Iran deal, Israel again raises possibility of strikes on nuclear sites
Opens in new window
]
In this so-called 'comprehensive report', the IAEA said Iran's co-operation with the agency has 'been less than satisfactory' when it comes to uranium traces discovered by IAEA inspectors at several locations in Iran that Tehran has failed to declare as nuclear sites.
Western officials suspect that the uranium traces discovered by the IAEA could provide evidence that Iran had a secret military nuclear programme until 2003.
One of the sites became known publicly in 2018 after Mr Netanyahu revealed it at the United Nations and called it a clandestine nuclear warehouse hidden at a rug-cleaning plant.
Iran denied this but in 2019 IAEA inspectors detected the presence of man-made uranium particles there. – AP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
4 hours ago
- Irish Times
What Trump is doing to US universities is not as bad as the McCarthyite witch trials – it's worse
Some have said the current assault on American universities is the worst since the McCarthyite purges of the 1940s and 1950s. It's actually much worse. McCarthyism targeted individuals with 'Communistic' beliefs, which could include anything left of centre. Donald Trump similarly seeks to stamp out dissent. But his attack is McCarthyism on steroids, attempting to destroy universities as institutions. Trump began by threatening to withhold federal funding from universities that refused his demands. The US spends roughly $60 billion a year on university-based research and development, about half the size of the total Irish governmental budget. Because these funds have already been appropriated by the US Congress, withholding them is illegal. Yet Trump is doing it anyway and daring the courts to stop him. In March, Columbia University, fearful of losing $400 million in federal funding, caved to Trump's demands including surrendering control over its Middle Eastern studies programme. In April, Harvard fought back and has had nearly $2 billion pulled. These funds support all manner of research, and their suspension will have devastating effects on scientific progress, the benefits of which would have been felt far beyond the American borders. Just to take one example, say you or a relative develop Alzheimer's disease: these cuts will delay the search for treatments. More recently, Trump escalated his attack on another key source of university revenue: international students, who make up more than 20 per cent of the student body at most American research universities. Across the country, immigration officers have disappeared international students involved in anti-Israel protests. A haunting video showed one woman, Rumeysa Ozturk, walking near campus, pulled into an unmarked car in broad daylight by masked, plainclothes officers. In some cases, the government has provided no information as to the whereabouts of these students or information as to why they were detained. READ MORE [ CCTV footage shows US immigration detaining college student Rumeysa Ozturk Opens in new window ] International students seeking to re-enter the US have been detained at the border; like undocumented migrants, these students with the legal right to study in the country fear going home in case they are not allowed to travel back. Now, Trump has revoked Harvard's certification for enrolling international students , leaving nearly 7,000 in limbo. And last week, the State Department paused appointments for international student visas , which affects any non-citizen wishing to study at any US university. These actions will permanently damage American higher education – not simply Harvard or Columbia, which are just the most prominent examples. All American universities are potentially in the firing line. The New York Times reported last week that a Trump administration taskforce had identified 10 universities for particular attention. They include George Washington University; Johns Hopkins University; New York University; Northwestern; the University of California, Berkeley; the University of California, Los Angeles; the University of Minnesota; and the University of Southern California. Many measures may be blocked in the courts; indeed, a judge has already prevented him from blocking Harvard's enrolment of international students. Regardless, the measures have created so much uncertainty that no international student can feel good about studying in the US. Who would want to bet their future education on the chance that American courts will restrain Trump? And even if a Democrat wins the White House in 2028, any student considering a multiyear degree in the US will have to factor in the possibility of a future republican victory. [ Judge blocks Trump administration's ban on international student enrolments at Harvard Opens in new window ] To be sure, universities made themselves vulnerable to attack. By cracking down on pro-Palestinian protests in 2024, many gave Trump an entering wedge. Now 'fighting anti-Semitism' is the flimsy pretext of his current assault. Private universities, in particular, are elitist institutions. The annual cost of a Harvard bachelor's degree is just over $90,000 for next year, though many students – including international students – benefit from need-based financial aid. Because most US universities, including public ones, depend on private gifts to balance their books, they focus on pleasing big donors. They kowtow not just to the rich, but to the ultra-rich. [ Donald Trump's chilling assault on universities mirrors that of the Nazis in 1930s Germany Opens in new window ] Trump retains a lot of political support for anti-elitist attacks on academia among voters without third-level education who have trended republican. The Maga movement loves hierarchies based on wealth, nationality, race, and gender. But it hates the kind of hierarchies that US universities supply: ones based on merit and thereby more open to women and people of colour. Trump's arch nemesis, Barack Obama, demonstrates how a black man could rise to the presidency through academic institutions: Columbia, Harvard Law, and a professorship at the University of Chicago. As imperfect as US universities are, they remain vital institutions of free speech, which is precisely why Trump is attacking them. His attacks have had a chilling effect on college campuses. Some, such as Columbia, have been internally riven over how to respond. Academics and students are demoralised. Many are fighting back, but they are forced to redirect their energy away from studying, teaching, and researching. Three leading scholars of fascism – Marci Shore, Jason Stanley and Timothy Snyder – made headlines by leaving Yale for the University of Toronto. Needless to say, it is a disturbing sign for American democracy when those who know the most about fascism's rise start to flee. Destroying higher education is a strange way of making America great again. US universities have been not just engines of economic growth, they have been tremendous sources of soft power. According to one count, more than 50 current world leaders were educated in the US. Like other aspects of Trump's radical agenda such as his imposition of tariffs, his attack on universities in the name of America First is rapidly accelerating the decline of his country's geopolitical power. But Trump's attack on academia presents Ireland with a unique opportunity . Just think how desirable it is for researchers and students to come here to an English-speaking country that is a functioning democracy. Minister for Education James Lawless recently announced a scheme for attracting disaffected American academics. Yet it is unclear whether it will be of the necessary scale and ambition to truly benefit from the US brain drain. Such a scheme, if successful, would enable Ireland not only to be a refuge for academic freedom and democracy, it would generate long-term economic growth through science and innovation. But the scheme shouldn't be too narrowly focused on the hard sciences. After all, we need artists, humanists, and social scientists – and perhaps some scholars of fascism – to help us understand the madness that is Trump's America. Dr Daniel Geary is Mark Pigott Professor in US History at Trinity College Dublin
Irish Times
5 hours ago
- Irish Times
Forget hope. Be a hopeful pessimist instead
Pope Francis was a nice fella, but was he wrong about hope? Diagnosing the problems of the modern world, he argued that what we need more than anything today is belief in a better future. Yet many of the worst actors globally are infused with overconfidence, or excessive optimism. Hope itself appears to have become an impediment to tackling urgent challenges. Action on climate change is weakened by a general hope technology will come to the rescue. European defence against Russia is undermined by a hazy belief Vladimir Putin will metamorphose into a peacemaker. Dealing with Ireland's housing crisis is crippled by a faith in the same old policies. I've lost track of the number of people who said in the wake of Donald Trump's election as US president 'ah, sure, he mightn't be so bad'. And then there's the irrational exuberance surrounding artificial intelligence , with governments now tending to see the glass as half full regarding this potentially cataclysmic technology. Not for nothing is the biography of OpenAI boss Sam Altman called The Optimist. Philosophers have long discussed the paradoxical nature of hope. READ MORE 'Only one thing is more stupid than absolute pessimism and that is absolute optimism,' said Albert Camus. His thinking on the matter was informed by a conundrum that also troubled Pope Francis: Why are people so indifferent to the suffering of others? Francis described indifference as 'the opposite of love', and believed it was a much more common evil in human affairs than hate. Camus, who was active in the French resistance against the Nazis, was also deeply troubled by political apathy and saw it as essentially anti-love. Modern man 'fornicated and read the papers', Camus wrote in a damning assessment of our unmotivated condition. Francis saw hope as the answer to indifference. 'It is often said that 'so long as there is life, there is hope', but the truth, if anything, is the opposite: it is hope that keeps life going, protects it, takes care of it, helps it to grow,' he wrote. Camus was more ambivalent about optimism, and argued pessimism could be a more powerful force against inertia, what he called 'man's strongest temptation'. He was particularly wary of ideological hope in 'some great idea' – be it religious or secular – that deflected us from reality. 'We find in his [Camus's] pessimism a clearsightedness that cuts through all the subterfuges and evasions available in his time to the beating core of his activism: that we must do what must be done, for reasons of justice and solidarity – because we owe it to our fellow human beings to prevent their suffering as best we can ... Camus proposes a fierce philosophy of action that is as bold as it is stark, stripped from any confidence of victory,' philosopher Mara Van der Lugt writes in a new book, Hopeful Pessimism. [ Don't dismiss Peig Sayers. Her stoic folk wisdom has plenty to offer today Opens in new window ] Camus's wariness of hope seems well founded when considering the utopian thinking of today's tech moguls. Elon Musk , the world's richest man, dreams of occupying Mars and re-engineering democracy. And to achieve this goal, we need less – not more – concern for the suffering of our fellow human beings. 'The fundamental weakness of western civilisation is empathy. The empathy exploit. They're exploiting a bug in western civilisation, which is the empathy response,' the multi-billionaire whined on the Joe Rogan podcast earlier this year. For utopians like Musk, human solidarity interferes with grand visions. So what is the right approach to hope? One way of resolving the conundrum is by definitions. Hope can be defined as either positive thinking or constructive thinking. One is more passive than the other. Optimism can be defined as a belief in a positive outcome. It has a faith element, and potentially carries higher risks and rewards. Studies show optimists live longer but are also more likely to take risks. 'The evidence suggests that optimism is widespread, stubborn and costly,' the psychologist Daniel Kahneman said. He had in mind particularly the optimism around public projects, and how spending estimates on infrastructure were always pitched towards the most hopeful end of the spectrum. Hello National Children's Hospital . Then there is utopianism, which can be defined as an ideological attachment to progress or some idealised future. [ Could there be good reason to believe in life after death? Opens in new window ] So defined, it's always good to have some hope. Treat optimism with caution and be very wary of utopianism. Van der Lugt resolves the matter in a different way, saying we should strive to become 'hopeful pessimists'. This aims to take the best of what optimism and pessimism both have to offer. It has the advantage of drawing us away from self-centred hope, and towards the responsibilities we have to our fellow human beings and the wider world. 'If anything, the pessimists have taught me this: with eyes full of that darkness there can still be this strange shattering openness, like a door cracked open, for the good to make its entry into life. Since all things are uncertain, so too is the future, and so there is always the possibility of change for better as there is for worse,' writes Van der Lugt. An exclusive focus on hope can lead us towards passivity and indifference. Better that we are hopeful pessimists who, as Van der Lugt puts it, 'strive for change without certainties, without expecting anything from our efforts other than the knowledge that we have done what we are called upon to do as moral agents in a time of change'.
Irish Times
5 hours ago
- Irish Times
Dozens of Gazans killed and injured trying get aid, health ministry says
Dozens of Palestinians were killed or injured by Israeli fire on their way to collect food aid from distribution hubs in southern Gaza under a controversial new US-backed humanitarian scheme, the besieged enclave's health ministry said. The health ministry said 31 people had been killed with many injured taken to hospitals on Sunday morning after the Israeli military opened fire at crowds heading towards two food distribution stations run by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), one of which was closed. The Israel Defense Forces denied this, saying an initial inquiry found it 'did not fire at civilians while they were near or within the humanitarian aid distribution site and that reports to this effect are false'. GHF said reports of deaths and injuries at its distribution site on Sunday were 'untrue and fabricated' and that aid had been distributed 'without incident'. READ MORE 'Our aid was again distributed today without incident,' GHF said, warning of 'rumours being actively fomented by Hamas'. The reports could not be independently verified. Israel – which in March imposed a crushing blockade on Gaza that has pushed the 2.1 million population to the edge of famine – has in recent days allowed limited quantities of aid into the strip via the UN and the GHF-led system. Under the new GHF model, Gazans must travel – in many cases for long distances on foot – to receive boxed meals from distribution hubs secured by US private security contractors and the Israeli military. The hubs are so far located primarily in the south. Since it began operations over the past week, the little-known organisation has set up three distribution hubs in south and central Gaza – although only one, in Tal al-Sultan, has been active over the past three days. The UN and most other humanitarian groups have refused to co-operate, accusing the GHF of having 'weaponised' aid to force the displacement of Palestinians to southern Gaza and violating humanitarian principles. [ Gaza aid foundation chief quits as Israeli air strikes kill dozens Opens in new window ] A UN spokesperson this week described Gaza as 'the hungriest place on earth'. In its first day of operations on Tuesday, the Tal al-Sultan hub was overrun by thousands of desperate people, with dozens injured by gunfire and taken to a Red Cross field hospital near the centre. GHF and Israeli military officials denied at the time that any aid recipients were injured. The killings on Sunday will deepen doubts about GHF's ability to replace the UN, which previously delivered aid to families at local distribution sites. Medical charity Médecins Sans Frontières on Saturday described the new system as 'disastrous. Ineffective. Dangerous. Reckless. Dehumanising'. Sunday's casualties were taken to the Red Cross-operated field hospital in southern Gaza near the Tal al-Sultan distribution centre, and to the Nasser Medical Complex in Khan Younis. [ Gaza doctor whose nine children were killed in Israeli strike dies from wounds from same attack Opens in new window ] Victoria Rose, a British plastic surgeon volunteering at Nasser, said in a video that the hospital had received an 'extortionate amount of people' wounded by gunshots. 'It's absolute carnage here,' she said. Israel said the new system was necessary to ensure that Hamas, whose October 7th, 2023, attack on southern Israel triggered the war, was not able to divert aid. According to the GHF, more than 4.7 million meals have been distributed so far to an estimated 67,000 families. Humanitarian officials say they had not seen evidence of systematic diversion of aid under the old UN-led model. Sunday's violence came as efforts to secure a new ceasefire in Gaza, mediated by the US, Egypt and Qatar, faltered. US envoy Steve Witkoff said on Saturday that amendments proposed by Hamas to a potential deal – under which fighting would stop for 60 days, over two dozen Israeli hostages would be released, and aid would flow into the territory – were 'totally unacceptable' . The Palestinian militant group wants any deal to include a guarantee that Israel will fully withdraw its troops from the enclave and permanently end the war, demands that prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu's government has rejected. Witkoff urged Hamas to accept his framework proposal, which he said would allow the start of 'good-faith negotiations' over a full end to the conflict. Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2025
