Latest news with #non-NPT
Gulf Today
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Gulf Today
Israel maintains its policy of nuclear ambiguity
It is ironic that two nuclear weapons powers, the US and Israel, attacked non-nuclear Iran's research sites and put them out of action for months or years. While Donald Trump has repeatedly said Iran cannot be permitted to obtain a nuclear weapon, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin said its June 12-day war on Iran was meant to stop it from making nuclear weapons. Iran has denied it seeks to produce nuclear arms and argues its nuclear programme is solely for peaceful civilian purposes. Iran has no bombs and is a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The US, which has 5,500 nuclear warheads, is among the states recognised as possessing nuclear bombs along with France, Britain, Russia, and China. Pakistan, India, and North Korea also have bombs while non-NPT member Israel does not admit to having at least 90 nuclear devices plus between 750 and 1,110 kilograms of plutonium, which would be enough to build 187 to 277 nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, Israel relies on a policy of ambiguity to avoid criticism or sanctions. Iran has submitted to NPT controls and inspections and had abided by the 2015 agreement with the US, France, Britain, Germany, Russia and China until 2018 when Trump took the US out of the deal and imposed punitive sanctions, crippling Iran's economy. In 2019, Iran began to breach the terms of the deal by enriching uranium to 60 per cent (a provocative gesture) instead of sticking to the 3.67 per cent permitted, amassing a large stockpile, and curbing UN nuclear watchdog (IAEA) inspections. Israeli ambiguity over its nuclear bomb programme and arsenal has been exposed as pointless by a number of international and Israeli writers and experts. France played a key role in the creation in the late 1950's of Israel's nuclear programme by helping to build Israel's main reactor at Dimona in the Negev desert where plutonium was first produced, the first step in weaponization. French-Israeli cooperation initially remained a secret from the US, Israel's protector, which repeatedly queried Israel on its activities at Dimona. Among the whistle-blowers were defected Dimona employee Mordechai Vanunu, Israeli professor Israel Shahak, and Israeli-US historian Avner Cohen. Vanunu published an article in London's Sunday Times in 1986, Shahak released his book 'Open Secrets' in 1997, and Cohen brought out 'Israel and the Bomb' in 1998. It is significant that Shahak and Cohen published their books more than a decade after Vanunu challenged Israel's policy of ambiguity. Vanunu fled Israel but was kidnapped from Rome by Israeli agents, tried, spent 18 years in prison, 11 in solitary confinement, and when released, was banned from travelling outside Israel. I met Vanunu at a dinner party in occupied East Jerusalem soon after he was released from prison in 2004. Branded as a 'traitor' by the Israeli government, Vanunu became a sad, lonely figure hanging around the American Colony hotel's courtyard cafe. Unlike Vanunu, neither Cohen nor Shahak, who was a friend of mine, faced harsh treatment by the Israeli government. 'In 1969, the US accepted the Israeli exceptionalist nuclear status, as long as Israel remained committed to keeping its presence invisible and opaque. This is known as the 1969 Nixon-Meir nuclear deal,' Cohen told MEE. The leaders involved were Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir and US President Richard Nixon. Since then, Israel has stuck to ambiguity while the US has not called this a fraud. It is suspected that Israel conducted a secret bomb test in the South Atlantic/Indian Ocean in 1979 with the cooperation of the apartheid South African government which developed its nuclear programme to reach weaponisation stage but abandoned it in 1989. While maintaining its policy of nuclear ambiguity, Israel remains the sole regional state to possess nuclear weapons. Israel has vowed not to use them unless it faced an existential threat. However, it was reported during the 1973 October/Ramadan war when Egypt and Syria mounted a surprise attack on Israel, it stood up but did not use nuclear bombs. While Egypt recaptured territory occupied by Israel in Sinai and Syria in the Golan, the US provided Israel with the arms and munitions needed to roll back these advances. This was a destructive intervention. If, instead, the US had imposed a ceasefire in place, both Egypt and Syria might have reached peace treaties with Israel at that time. Victor Galinsky and Leonard Weiss wrote in March 2025 in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists about an 'extraordinary three-part series on Israeli television, 'The Atom and Me,' [which] lays out how the country got its nuclear weapons.' Effectively torpedoing Israel's policy of ambiguity, the series describes how the US aided Israel in this effort. 'The United States' indulgence of Israeli nuclear weapons has not escaped international attention, and the evident hypocrisy has undermined US non-proliferation policy. The US government's public position continues to be that it does not know anything about Israeli nuclear weapons, and this will apparently continue until Israel releases the United States' gag. This policy is allegedly enforced by a secret federal bulletin that threatens disciplinary actions for any US official who publicly acknowledges Israel's nuclear weapons.' The writers exposed the result of this policy: 'The existence of these weapons may have started as a deterrent against another Holocaust but has now morphed into an instrument of an aggressive and expansionist Israel.' This has been notably true during the premiership of Netanyahu — who Galinsky and Weiss wrote — bragged about nuclear weapons in a 2016 speech on the delivery of Israel's Rahav submarine which was built by Germany. 'The Times of Israel, using the standard 'according to foreign reports,' described the submarine as 'capable of delivering a nuclear payload.' In his speech, Netanyahu said, 'Above all else, our submarine fleet acts as a deterrent to our enemies... They need to know that Israel can attack, with great might, anyone who tries to harm it.' The writers asked, 'How else, other than with nuclear weapons, can a submarine be a deterrent?'
France 24
28-06-2025
- Politics
- France 24
Iran's thorny IAEA relations hit new low after Israeli, US strikes
The latest phase in Tehran's troubled relations with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) kicked off not long after Israel launched massive, unprecedented strikes on Iran on June 13, killing top Iranian military officials and nuclear scientists. When EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas declared on X that bloc members 'agree' that Iran must never have a nuclear weapon, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei fired a social media salvo. 'How can you express concern over Iran's peaceful program that is under the most robust IAEA's inspections and ignore the fact that the Israeli regime has a huge arsenal of #NuclearWeapons?!' Baqaei posted on X. As a signatory to the UN's nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran is required to accept IAEA inspections. Israel is exempt from nuclear inspections since it's one of only five countries not party to the NPT. While Israel neither confirms nor denies that it possesses nuclear arms, the country is estimated to have at least 80 nuclear weapons, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). It's an old source of grievance among hardliners in the Islamic Republic, and it picked up steam as Israeli bombardments continued. By June 19, Baqaei had IAEA chief Rafael Grossi in his sights. 'You turned IAEA into a tool of convenience for non-NPT members to deprive NPT members of their basic right under Article 4,' the Iranian foreign ministry spokesman told Grossi on X, referring to the treaty's enshrined right to peaceful nuclear activities. The anti-IAEA rhetoric was put into action this week when the Iranian parliament on Wednesday passed a bill to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. The next morning, Iran's constitutional watchdog, the Guardian Council, approved the parliamentary vote. By the end of the day, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi asserted on state TV that the suspension was "binding" following the Guardian Council approval and added that there was 'no doubt about its implementation'. 'Double standards' of a shah-era treaty Iran's decision to suspend cooperation with the IAEA was a regrettable, but not surprising development for diplomats and experts who have worked on the issue for decades. 'It has always been part of the tactics to stop, to interrupt, and to resume the cooperation with the IAEA,' said Jacques Audibert, a diplomat and former negotiator for France on the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. 'Today, they have obvious reasons, because their facilities are supposed to be obliterated. I can imagine that politically it's difficult for them.' 'They've suspended. It's not a withdrawal. And while they're talking about withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty, they haven't done so. Even so, the suspension of the inspections and of the relationship with the IAEA is going to fuel the narrative that Iran intends to build a weapon,' noted James Dorsey, senior fellow at the Singapore-based S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies and host of the popular podcast, 'The Turbulent World of Middle East Soccer'. Iran signed the NPT in 1968, during the reign of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who was ousted in the 1979 Islamic Revolution. For over four decades, the Islamic Republic authorities have railed against the 'double standards' that oblige the country to comply with inspection requirements of a shah-era treaty while Israel goes scot-free, developing nuclear weapons without fear of sanctions or Western disfavour. But Iran, unlike North Korea, has never withdrawn from the landmark UN treaty, fearing a devastating response from Israel, or worse, the USA. That deterrence collapsed this month, with the 12-day war killing at least 627 Iranians and wounding nearly 4,900, according to official figures. Human rights groups say the Iranian death toll exceeds 1,000. Meanwhile Iran's retaliatory strikes on Israel killed 28 people, according to Israeli authorities. While US President Donald Trump announced a 'ceasefire' on Monday, Iran has never used the term, describing the cessation of hostilities as a 'halting of retaliatory strikes' against Israel. At a NATO summit in The Hague this week, Trump compared the US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities to the 1945 US nuclear attacks on Japan. "When you look at Hiroshima, if you look at Nagasaki, that ended a war, too," Trump said. "This ended a war in a different way." Experts, however, are not at all sure that Trump's touted end of hostilities will hold. 'I think the reason why the United States is insisting on saying, we've done it, we're finished, is that Trump does not want to be drawn into a longer war,' said Dorsey. Playing the long game Trump may be blindsided by the short term, but Iran has a history of playing the long game by adopting a cat-and-mouse strategy with the IAEA. In 2018, when Trump, under his first presidency, withdrew the US from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), also called the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, Tehran waited for a year for Washington to come back to the deal before announcing its partial withdrawal in May 2019. Two years later, Tehran halted its implementation of the Additional Protocol stipulated in the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, which permitted the IAEA enhanced inspection rights – including snap inspections and continuous surveillance. Iran, however, continued to comply with IAEA's Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement after 2021, which permitted access to Iran's declared nuclear sites, until the Israeli strikes this month cut off access to the country. 'Iran adhered to the 2015 international agreement into 2019. When that didn't persuade the Americans to return to the agreement, they progressively started to abandon adherence to various provisions, including the limit on uranium enrichment,' said Dorsey. 'The original reason for enriching to 60% was to pressure the United States to return to the agreement. Circumstances have since changed.' Following the US strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, attention has focused on the infamous 408.6 kg of uranium enriched up to 60% that the IAEA in May declared the regime had amassed. Trump and US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth slammed US media for reporting initial intelligence assessments that the strikes only succeeded in pushing back Iran's nuclear program by mere months. They insist the US-Israeli strikes have 'obliterated' and 'decimated' Iran's nuclear capacity. While some Iranian officials admitted the country's nuclear facilities have been heavily damaged, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Thursday insisted that Tehran's enemies 'did not achieve anything from this war. They attacked our nuclear facilities, but they were unable to do anything important.' Audibert is dismissive of the claims and counterclaims on both sides. 'We are in a posturing phase, which is not taking reality into account,' he noted. 'What Khamenei said has no link with reality. He said it's a big victory [for Iran], that Israel almost collapsed, and that Iran slapped the United States in the face. This doesn't make sense. On the other hand, the US defence secretary is trying to explain to everybody that it has been a full success. I'm not putting the two on the same level, but it's the same posturing phase.' Providing a 'pretext' for Israel's 'unlawful attack' For the facts to be established, evidence must be gathered on the ground. While the war on Iran raged for 12 days, the IAEA deemed it impossible to assess the damage to nuclear sites and material on the ground since the UN agency 'lost visibility [on enriched uranium stocks] from the moment hostilities began", Grossi told French TV station France 2 on Wednesday. 'During a war, we cannot inspect, we cannot move. But as soon as hostilities stopped, and especially given the sensitivity surrounding this material, I believe it is in everyone's interest that we resume our activities as soon as possible,' said Grossi. The IAEA chief also slammed Iran's decision to suspend cooperation with the UN watchdog agency. 'Iran's cooperation with us is not a favour, it is a legal obligation as long as Iran remains a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty,' he noted. But Tehran is particularly piqued with the UN nuclear agency after the IAEA board passed a resolution on June 12 declaring that Iran was breaching its non-proliferation obligations. The next day, Israel launched its attacks on Iran. While Israel did not mention the IAEA resolution, US Vice President JD Vance cited the IAEA resolution to make a case for the military action against Iran. In the initial days of the war, Grossi took to the airwaves to repeatedly explain that the IAEA had not assessed that Tehran was building a nuclear weapon. But Grossi's clarifications failed to mollify Iranian authorities. 'This is too late, Mr. Grossi. You obscured this truth in your absolutely biased report,' Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Baqaei said in a post on X, excoriating the IAEA for providing a 'pretext' for Israel's 'unlawful attack on our peaceful nuclear facilities'. On Friday night, amid mounting pressure to establish the facts on the ground, Iran once again slammed Grossi, rejecting his request to visit its nuclear sites. "Grossi's insistence on visiting the bombed sites under the pretext of safeguards is meaningless and possibly even malign in intent," Araghchi said on X. "Iran reserves the right to take any steps in defence of its interests, its people and its sovereignty." Russia wants Iran-IAEA cooperation But apart from its fiery rhetoric, Iran has very little room for maneouvre in its dealings with the IAEA at the UN Security Council. In the event of non-cooperation, such as refusal of access, concealment of materials, or failure to provide justification for the presence of uranium, the IAEA has the right to refer the matter to the UN Security Council, which could result in sanctions, increased diplomatic pressure, or calls for the resumption of negotiations. On the nuclear issue, Iran is isolated at the top rung of the top UN body, with the five veto-holding permanent Security Council members keen to see Tehran back under inspections. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Thursday spoke out against Iran suspending cooperation with the IAEA. "We are interested in continuing cooperation between Iran and the IAEA, so that everybody respects Iran's repeated statements that Iran does not have and will not have plans to develop a nuclear weapon," Lavrov said at a press conference in Moscow. During the recent war, Iran's closest allies, Russia and China, provided rhetorical, but very little concrete support for Iran. Both Russia and China are nuclear powers and permanent UN Security Council members with little appetite to handle a nuclear armed Iran further destabilising the Middle East powder keg region. Withdrawing from the NPT risks further isolation since a UN Security Council resolution could see sanctions that add further burdens to Iran's long-suffering population. 'Suspending inspections is a violation [of the NPT],' said Dorsey. 'This is not a free membership, you sign up to obligations and those obligations include the degree of enrichment and they include inspections.' While some members of the international community may understand Iran's position in the immediate aftermath of the devastating Israeli and US strikes, there will be pressure on Iran to fall in line with its nuclear commitments. 'If Iran does not comply, it's going to be interpreted as retaining the freedom to develop a weapon,' said Dorsey. 'Iran is a country that has been sanctioned for much of the existence of the Islamic Republic since 1979. Let's be clear about it, in that sense, Iran is its own worst enemy.'
India Gazette
22-06-2025
- Politics
- India Gazette
"US military aggression is flagrant violation of international law": Iran's Permanent Mission to UN
New York [USA], June 22 (ANI): Following US attacks on Iranian nuclear sites, the Permanent Mission of Iran to the United Nations has submitted an urgent letter to the UN Security Council, strongly denouncing what it describes as the United States' unlawful and reckless attack on Iran's nuclear infrastructure. The communication holds both the US and Israel fully responsible for what it terms blatant violations of international law, warning of serious consequences for their actions. Iran's envoy warned that the strike undermines the credibility of the global non-proliferation regime and poses a threat to the legal framework governing civilian nuclear energy. 'Such blatant acts of aggression and violations committed by a non-NPT party, the Israeli regime, which possesses undeclared, unsafeguarded nuclear capabilities, maintains a stockpile of nuclear weapons, and has a notorious record of attacking peaceful nuclear facilities across the region and further perpetrated by the United States, the only Member State ever to have used nuclear weapons in war, massacring millions of civilians in two single strikes during World War II, and which has now openly targeted Iran's peaceful nuclear facilities that have remained under the full verification and continuous monitoring of the International Atomic Energy Agency,' the letter reads. Tehran in its letter further said that the United States' military aggression against sovereignty and territorial integrity constitutes a 'manifest' and 'flagrant' violation of international law and the 'peremptory' international norms enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. 'Undoubtedly, the United States' military aggression against sovereignty and territorial integrity constitutes a manifest and flagrant violation of international law and the peremptory international norms enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, which categorically prohibit the threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of any Member State (Article 2(4) of the UN Charter). The US's armed attack against Iran's peaceful sites and facilities also violates the Statute of the Agency, IAEA General Conference Resolutions, and Security Council Resolutions 487 (1981) and 2231 (2015) and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT),' it added. 'In light of the grave and far-reaching consequences of the United States' savage and criminal actions for international peace and security, the Islamic Republic of Iran urgently requests the Security Council to convene an emergency meeting without delay to address this blatant and unlawful act of aggression, to condemn it in the strongest possible terms, and to take all necessary measures under its Charter-mandated responsibilities that the perpetrator of such heinous crimes is held fully accountable and does not go unpunished,' the letter further reads. A Foreign Ministry spokesman of Oman also expressed deep concern over the escalation in the Israel-Iran conflict following US strikes and called for immediate and comprehensive de-escalation. Earlier, Iran's mission to the UN demanded an urgent meeting of the Security Council following US' attacks on its nuclear facilities. The mission described the US bombing as a 'blatant and illegal aggression' and demanded it be condemned in the strongest possible terms. The United States' military aggression against sovereignty and territorial integrity constitutes a manifest and flagrant violation of international law and the peremptory international norms enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. The Embassy of Iran in India shared a statement issued by AEOI confirming that early on Sunday morning, Iran's nuclear sites were 'subjected to savage aggression--an act in violation of international laws, particularly the NPT.' 'This action, which violates international regulations, unfortunately took place under the indifference--and even complicity--of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),' it said. 'This action, which violates international regulations, unfortunately took place under the indifference--and even complicity--of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),' it said. 'Following attacks on three nuclear sites in Iran - including Fordow - the IAEA can confirm that no increase in off-site radiation levels has been reported as of this time,' the international nuclear energy agency said in a social media post. Earlier in the day, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the United States for launching airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities, calling it a serious violation of international law, the UN Charter and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The top Iranian diplomat accused the US, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), of 'lawless and criminal behaviour' by targeting what he described as peaceful nuclear installations. (ANI)
India.com
20-06-2025
- Politics
- India.com
Neither Israel nor Donald Trump, Iran blames this man's 2 major mistakes for war because..., he is....
Neither Israel nor Donald Trump, Iran blames this man's 2 major mistakes for war because…, he is… Amid the ongoing bloody conflict between Israel and Iran, the role of the United Kingdom is still uncertain. The White House on Thursday said that President Donald Trump is going to decide in the next two weeks whether America will jump into the ongoing war, supporting Israel, or try to negotiate between the two countries to resolve the conflict peacefully. Surprisingly, Tehran has not directly blamed Israel or the US for the conflict; rather, it has put Director General of the International Atomic Agency (IAEA) Rafael Grossi in the dock. As per the Middle East country, the foundation for inciting war was laid by two major mistakes of Grossi. Mistake 1: Telling The Truth Too Late In a recent interview with CNN, Grossi said that the IAEA has not found any evidence against Iran that suggests that it is making nuclear weapons. But Iran alleges that the statement came too late, and IAEA's report worked to create a negative atmosphere against it all over the world. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ismail Baqai Hamaneh called it the truth that came too late. He said the US and European countries passed a resolution that Iran is making nuclear weapons, which Israel used as an excuse to attack. Mistake 2: Accusations of biased reporting Iran accuses IAEA Director General Grossi of bias, claiming the agency is now unfairly targeting NPT member states while favouring non-NPT nations like Israel. Iranian official Bakai asserts this constitutes a misuse of the IAEA's authority and warns that such biased reporting has significant repercussions. Iran Said Innocents Die Due To Grossi's Report Iran's former foreign minister Javed Zarif slammed Grossi, stating that many innocent Iranian people were killed due to the IAEA's incorrect and irresponsible reporting. He blamed Grossi for severely damaging the agency's reputation, claiming the harm was beyond repair. Following Israeli attacks, Iran has halted on-site inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA currently relies on satellite imagery for monitoring, and the enrichment level of uranium stockpiled at the Isfahan facility remains unconfirmed.
Shafaq News
19-06-2025
- Politics
- Shafaq News
Iran slams IAEA chief over 'biased' reporting about nuclear program
Shafaq News/ Iran criticized International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi on Thursday, accusing him of fueling a military escalation through what it described as biased reporting and misleading assessments of Tehran's nuclear program. The backlash follows Grossi's recent remarks in a CNN interview, where he stated that the agency had seen 'no evidence of a systematic effort [by Iran] to move into a nuclear weapon.' Despite this, Iranian officials argue the acknowledgment came too late and failed to mitigate the damage caused by earlier IAEA reports that, they say, contributed to international hostility against Iran. Esmaeil Baqaei, spokesperson for Iran's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, condemned Grossi's comments, calling them a 'belated admission.' In a post on X, Baqaei accused the IAEA chief of obscuring the truth in a previous 'biased report' that was allegedly used by the United States and European powers (E3) to justify a resolution accusing Iran of non-compliance with nuclear obligations. 'That same resolution,' Baqaei said, 'was later used as a final pretext by a genocidal, warmongering regime [Israel] to launch an unlawful war of aggression on Iran and attack our peaceful nuclear facilities.' He further questioned Grossi's impartiality, suggesting that the IAEA under his leadership had become 'a tool of convenience for non-NPT members to deprive NPT signatories of their basic rights under Article 4' of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Baqaei demanded accountability, warning that 'misleading narratives have dire consequences.' DG @rafaelmgrossi:'We did not have any evidence of a systematic effort [by Iran] to move into a nuclear weapon.'This is too late, Mr. Grossi: you obscured this truth in your absolutely biased report that was instrumentalize by E3/U.S. to craft a resolution with baseless… — Esmaeil Baqaei (@IRIMFA_SPOX) June 19, 2025 In turn, former Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif echoed the criticism, stating that Grossi's 'irresponsible and fallacious' reporting had caused 'irreparable damage to the agency.' Zarif said the IAEA chief must be held accountable for his 'complicity in the death of innocents in Iran' as a result of Israeli strikes allegedly launched under the justification of IAEA findings. Indeed @rafaelmgrossi 's irresponsible and fallacious IAEA report has caused irreparable damage to the Agency. He must be held accountable for his complicity in the death of innocents in Iran caused by Israeli aggression using his report as a pretext. #Fire_Grossi — Javad Zarif (@JZarif) June 19, 2025 Grossi's comments come amid growing international concern following Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. He acknowledged in separate interviews with CNN and Bloomberg that while Iran is not actively building a nuclear weapon, the agency can no longer verify the safety or location of 60% enriched uranium previously stored at the Isfahan facility. With routine inspections suspended since the Israeli attacks, the IAEA has shifted to monitoring via satellite imagery. Grossi confirmed that no normal verification activities are underway, and Iranian authorities have not disclosed how they are securing the sensitive material.
