logo
US strikes on Iran's nuclear sites heighten safety fears – DW – 07/19/2025

US strikes on Iran's nuclear sites heighten safety fears – DW – 07/19/2025

DW4 days ago
While no radiation leaks have been confirmed following the US strikes on nuclear enrichment facilities in Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan, the extent of the damage remains uncertain.
Even a month after the US attacks on three major nuclear sites inside Iran, the effects of the airstrikes on June 22 remain unclear amid conflicting damage assessments.
The strikes were a part of what US President Donald Trump called "Operation Midnight Hammer" and targeted the nuclear facilities in the cities of Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan.
The operation involved 125 aircraft and specialty B-2 bombers carrying 30,000-pound bombs officially designated as Massive Ordinance Penetrators — and colloquially known as "bunker busters."
The strike in Fordo was the most significant. It is the country's most heavily fortified nuclear facility buried deep inside a mountain to shield it from attacks.
It is unclear when Iran began building the plant in Fordo but its existence was revealed to the world in 2009. The facility was designed to house around 3,000 centrifuges, machines used to enrich uranium.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
As part of Iran's 2015 nuclear deal — the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — with global powers, Tehran agreed to convert the site into a research facility and halt uranium enrichment there for 15 years.
But after US President Donald Trump, during his first term, unilaterally withdrew from the agreement in 2018, Iran resumed enrichment activity at Fordo.
Iran has been enriching uranium to 60% purity at the site, well beyond what is required for civilian nuclear power generation purposes. Tehran also announced plans to further expand enrichment capacity at the site.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA )also said it had found uranium particles at Fordo enriched to as high as 83.7% purity — significantly close to the 90% enrichment needed for weapons-grade uranium.
Another target of the US operation was the nuclear facility in Natanz, Iran's largest uranium enrichment hub, located around 140 miles (225 kilometers) south of Tehran.
Like the one in Fordo, Natanz is also a subterranean nuclear site that can hold around 50,000 centrifuges.
Both the Fordo and Natanz facilities had previously been targeted multiple times in a series of sophisticated attacks.
Iranian officials said these attacks — ranging from the 2010 Stuxnet cyberattack to incidents disabling the Fordo power grid and a remote-controlled explosion in Natanz four years ago — had already caused extensive destruction and severely damaged their enrichment capabilities.
The third nuclear site targeted by the US was the one in Isfahan, which was suspected of hosting near weapons-grade nuclear fuel.
In simple terms, this facility was converting natural uranium into uranium hexafluoride gas, which goes into centrifuges at Natanz and Fordo for uranium enrichment.
The sites at Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan are uranium enrichment facilities, and experts estimate that Iran already has more than 400 kilograms (880 pounds) of highly enriched uranium.
Despite the damage US strikes caused to the three sites, the fate of this enriched uranium remains uncertain.
Iranian government sources mostly claim that the enriched uranium has been moved to "secure" locations.
However, several media outlets have quoted Israeli sources as saying that the uranium was distributed among the three sites and "was not relocated."
A senior Israeli official, who did not want to be named, recently told the BBC that a portion of the enriched uranium was located deep within the Isfahan facility and that Iran could try to retrieve it.
The three targeted sites are believed not to have active nuclear reactors. However, Iran does have an operating nuclear power plant, in Bushehr, some 750 kilometer south of Tehran. The plant, which is monitored by the IAEA, is run by uranium supplied by Russia. Its spent fuel is also returned to Russia to prevent reprocessing into weapons-grade material.
The plant was not targeted in the US strikes.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
Following the US attacks, the IAEA said it didn't notice any increase in radiation levels in the region.
As no active reactors were targeted, the potential risk of radiation is limited to leakage of the uranium hexafluoride gas from enriched uranium storage tanks, centrifuge cascades or pipelines.
If released, the gas would react with moisture in the air to form uranyl fluoride and hydrofluoric acid, the latter being a highly corrosive and dangerous acid.
Contact with this acid or inhalation of its vapors can destroy lung tissue, and cause severe and deadly respiratory problems, which could result in suffocation and death.
"There are indeed indications that uranium hexafluoride was released at the facility site. Both radiological hazards and elevated radiation levels, as well as chemical dangers, were mentioned. This can only refer to the release of hydrofluoric acid," Clemens Walther, professor and nuclear expert at the Institute for Radioecology and Radiation Protection at the University of Hanover, told DW.
"However, it was clearly stated that the incident was confined to the site itself. No spread into residential areas has been reported."
Roland Wolff, an expert in radiation protection, medical and radiation physics, said uranium, as a heavy metal, is chemically toxic.
"It can, for example, cause kidney damage. Incorporation increases the risk of cancer as well as the risk of genetic damage due to the short-range alpha radiation. Depending on the scenario, this presents a potential hazard for both workers and the general population," he told DW.
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
The nuclear meltdowns in Chernobyl in 1986, and Fukushima in 2011, highlighted the radiation risks caused by reactor accidents.
The Fukushima disaster occurred when a magnitude 9 earthquake and tsunami disabled the power supply and cooling systems of three reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, on Japan's east coast.
Radioactive material was released from the site, leading to tens of thousands of people being evacuated.
But Wolff said the targeted sites don't pose a Chernobyl-style danger.
"The radioactive inventory in enrichment facilities, unlike in nuclear reactors, does not contain fission products," said the radiation expert. "Furthermore, it was not released into high altitudes by an explosion, as was the case in Chernobyl. Therefore, potential contamination is assumed to be local."
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Taiwan warns of Chinese interference before recall vote – DW – 07/23/2025
Taiwan warns of Chinese interference before recall vote – DW – 07/23/2025

DW

time11 minutes ago

  • DW

Taiwan warns of Chinese interference before recall vote – DW – 07/23/2025

Taiwan says China has no right to intervene in the recall vote on lawmakers whom activists see as cozying up to Beijing. China views Taiwan as its own territory. Taiwan will hold the largest recall vote in its history this weekend. The 24 legislators on the list are all from the largest opposition party, the Kuomintang (KMT). On Wednesday, Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council stated that it was evident and clear that the Chinese Communist Party was attempting to interfere with Taiwan's democratic process. "Recall in Taiwan is a civil right guaranteed by the constitution, and it is up to the people of Taiwan to decide who should or should not be removed from office." Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council said on its social media. The recall campaign was started by civic groups who accuse the KMT lawmakers of being too close to Beijing, which views Taiwan as its own territory. China's Taiwan Affairs Office and Chinese state media have repeatedly commented on the recall vote, urging Taiwanese voters to oppose it and echoing key talking points used by the KMT. For the recall to succeed, the number of votes in favor must outnumber the number of votes against. Turnout must exceed 25% of registered voters in the constituency. Although President Lai Ching-te won last year's election, his Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lost its parliamentary majority. Since then, the opposition has used its control of the legislature to pass bills opposed by the government and impose major budget cuts, especially those related to defense spending intended to guard against Chinese threats. China has rejected Lai's multiple offers of talks, branding him a "separatist," and has increased military pressure against Taiwan. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The KMT denies being pro-Beijing. The party insists on maintaining an open dialogue with China and condemn the recalls as a "malicious" attack on democracy that disregards the results of last year's parliamentary election. Most people in Taiwan identify primarily as Taiwanese. According to a survey conducted by the National Chengchi University Election Study Center, only 2.3% of Taiwanese people consider themselves Chinese. The Chinese government claims that Taiwan, a democratically self-ruled island, is a breakaway province that must be 'reunited' with the mainland by force, if necessary.

Germany moves to fast-track weapons purchases  – DW – 07/23/2025
Germany moves to fast-track weapons purchases  – DW – 07/23/2025

DW

timean hour ago

  • DW

Germany moves to fast-track weapons purchases – DW – 07/23/2025

Berlin wants to speed up the rate at which it can buy weapons, bypassing lengthy tender processes for military contracts. Critics warn that it could open a path to the unfair awarding of contracts and corrupt practices. Germany's cabinet has approved a draft law to accelerate arms procurement for the military, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius said Wednesday, calling it a "quantum leap" for national security. The bill is designed to cut red tape and allow the Bundeswehr to buy weapons and equipment faster and with fewer bureaucratic hurdles. The proposed legislation cites Russia as "the most immediate threat to peace and security" and stresses Germany's need to boost NATO defense capacity. Officials say there is no indication Moscow is willing to end the war in Ukraine and that Russia's war goals "go beyond Ukraine." "We want to speed up procurement to make Germany safer," Pistorius told a press conference in Berlin. "If the tank is full but the fuel line is clogged, then it won't help us much." Economy Minister Katherina Reiche said the changes would give arms producers planning certainty and help scale production. "We need more weapons and we need them faster," she said. To achieve defense capability, Germany is taking on significant new debt, Reiche said. "We must invest this money in new technologies for air defense, satellite capabilities, drones, autonomous systems, and AI capabilities." The draft law proposes higher so-called value limits so that the Bundeswehr can award contracts directly more quickly, rather then putting them out to tender. Currently, this value limit is generally €15,000 ($17,600), but it should be increased to €50,000, Reiche said. For contracts that strengthen defense capabilities, the new value limit would be €443,000 while the construction threshold would rise to €1 million. Procurement would also be accelerated for barracks construction and repair. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The federal government also wants to facilitate cooperation with start-ups developing innovative defense technology. These young companies could receive advance payments for contracts "on a much larger scale" in the future, Pistorius said. This is because they often lack the financial means "to be able to ramp up production quickly." To support the increased military spending, Germany has loosened its constitutional debt limits. NATO recently adopted a target for members to spend 5%, including related infrastructure, of GDP on defense by 2035 — a Cold War-level figure. The Green Party criticized the plans as inadequate with "far too little" being done. Green Party parliamentary group deputy Agnieszka Brugger told the newspaper it would be necessary to increase production capacities and solve supply chain problems. An example of how this could be achieved, she said, was through more joint European procurement projects. The Left Party accused the coalition of giving "priority" to "war preparation" with the law and allowing it to override contract standards. Left Party lawmaker Pascal Meiser said the bill opened up a doorway to wasteful spending and corruption. "The federal government's plans to accelerate awarding contracts threaten to become a gateway for the inefficient use of taxpayer money and crony capitalism," he said. The German Confederation of Skilled Crafts also urged safeguards to ensure fair competition and participation for small regional businesses.

World's top court says healthy environment is a human right – DW – 07/23/2025
World's top court says healthy environment is a human right – DW – 07/23/2025

DW

time2 hours ago

  • DW

World's top court says healthy environment is a human right – DW – 07/23/2025

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued its ruling on States' legal obligations in relation to climate change. In an watershed advisory opinion, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague has said a "clean, healthy and sustainable environment" is a human right, and that the climate must be protected for "present and future generations." Outlining the obligations of states to protect the human rights of citizens being impacted by climate change, the UN's highest court said "greenhouse gas emissions are unequivocally caused by human activities and have crossborder effects."Reading the ruling, ICJ president Yuji Iwasawa said "the consequences of climate change are severe and far-reaching," adding that they affect both natural ecosystems and human populations. "These consequences underscore the urgent and existential threat posed by climate change." He said countries have a duty to cooperate on preventing harm caused by climate change and must make sure their national climate targets represent the highest possible ambition. The case began after students from Pacific Island countries lobbied governments into calling for the legal clarification. The state of Vanuatu requested the ICJ to rule on the obligations of states under international law to protect the climate and environment from greenhouse gas emissions. And by extension present and future generations. In December, the court heard testimonies from almost 100 countries and 12 international organizations. Speaking at the time, Gaston Browne, Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda, told judges that sea level rise driven by "unchecked emissions" was eroding island coastlines and "swallowing land that is vital to our country." The Caribbean archipelago is being eroded by rising sea levels and faces more intense storms as a result of the impacts of a warming world. Also speaking as part of the December hearings, high-emitting nations, like the United States, said existing UN treaties — primarily the 2015 Paris Agreement — already provide legal obligations on action towards slowing climate change. President Donald Trump has since announced his country's withdrawal from the landmark accord that saw 195 nations agree to reduce carbon emissions and pursue efforts to limit global warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit). But experts say the Paris Agreement was never intended to define all laws around climate change. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Joie Chowdhury, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) says because rising temperatures affect "almost every possible dimension of our lives," there is scope for a lot of different laws. She also points to existing international regulations on human rights, international law and legislation around state responsibility as potential tools to enforce climate action. "The climate treaties remain very important, they're just not the only game in town," she told DW. In bringing the case to the court, Vanuatu also asked for clarification on the legal consequences for countries that failed to meet their obligations on slowing their emissions. Some experts say countries that have emitted most CO2 cumulatively — including the United States, China, Russia, and the European Union — carry the most responsibility for global warming. "Past emissions matter," Chowdhury told DW, adding that harm has already been done. "That must be recognized and repaired." Poorer countries have long been calling for richer nations to pay for damage caused by extreme weather linked to the emissions that are heating the planet. Many of these less wealthy states are experiencing the worst impacts of climate change, despite having done the least to contribute to the ICJ advisory warned that "adverse impacts and loss and damage will escalate with every increment of global warming". A loss and damage fund was established at UN climate negotiations two years ago in Dubai, but has only received around $700 million in pledges. That is far lower than the hundreds of billions of dollars experts say climate change could cost in damages by 2030. "At its heart, this case is about accountability. It's a signal to end the era of empty pledges," Chowdhury added. The ICJ advisory opinion is one of three that have been delivered in past months outlining state obligations around climate action. Earlier this month, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued an advisory opinion asserting countries' obligations to protect citizens' human rights by ensuring a healthy environment and stable climate. The opinion also highlighted states' responsibility in relation to disinformation and misinformation, adding that authorities should not obstruct the population's access to "reliable, truthful, and complete information" needed to address risks to human rights occurring through the climate emergency. And in May last year, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea was the first to issue its advisory opinion recognizing greenhouse gases as a form of marine pollution. Although advisory opinions are not legally binding, they hold significant legal weight and moral authority. Speaking ahead of Wednesday's ruling, Chowdhury said the advisory opinion could have far-reaching consequences for the November COP30 climate negotiations in Brazil. It could mean "not everything is up for negotiation' because some things have been clearly legally defined. "We hope very much that this clarity will provide a very clear legal blueprint which would allow states and those most affected on the front lines to hold polluters accountable for climate disruptive conduct and to secure remedy and reparations," she said. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store