Proliferation of nuclear weapons and International Atomic Energy Agency

The nearly seven-decade-old International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) works to ensure the peaceful use of nuclear energy worldwide. At the same time, one of its responsibilities is to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons. It was established in 1957 and functions as an autonomous agency under the United Nations. The agency assists its member states in ensuring the security of nuclear facilities and materials. In this regard, it formulates nuclear safety standards and guidelines. In addition, the IAEA provides technical assistance to member countries for the peaceful use of nuclear technology.

In 2015, during President Barack Obama's tenure, Iran signed an agreement with the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, China, and Russia—known as the P5+1 powers. Under this agreement, the IAEA was tasked with monitoring Iran's nuclear activities. After Donald Trump was elected US president in 2017, the nuclear deal with Iran was scrapped in 2018. Since then, Iran has accelerated its nuclear programme and has been enriching uranium. According to the latest IAEA report, Iran has enriched uranium to nearly 60 percent, which is close to the level needed to produce nuclear weapon. Typically, uranium enriched above 90 percent is used to produce nuclear weapons. On June 13, citing Iran's proximity to developing a nuclear bomb, Israel launched an attack targeting the country’s nuclear installations. Following the incident, Iran retaliated, leading to a conflict between the two nations.

Ten days into the retaliatory attacks by the warring nations, the United States conducted a targeted military operation against three of Iran's nuclear facilities, causing significant damage to Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, according to President Trump. Iran’s non-cooperative stance with the IAEA may raise concerns regarding the transparency of its nuclear programme. At the same time, it has sparked apprehensions about the implications for regional and global security. Meanwhile, questions have arisen regarding the extent of the IAEA’s role in safeguarding nuclear installations worldwide. Iran, justifying its non-cooperation, has accused the IAEA of failing to fulfil its responsibilities. Following the recent Israeli and US attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities, the IAEA has been accused by Iran’s parliament of failing to fulfil its duties. The Iranian parliament has also alleged that the IAEA has become a political tool. Meanwhile, nuclear weapons expert Alex Balfour told the BBC that on June 12, prior to the Israeli attack, Iran had informed the IAEA that it had constructed a new, well-secured nuclear facility capable of uranium enrichment. Alex said, “As far as we know, the location of that facility has not been disclosed—perhaps not even the Americans or Israelis know. They might have relocated the uranium there.”

Three days after the attack, a Pentagon assessment reported that Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium had not been destroyed. It stated that Iran’s centrifuges remained mostly intact and that damage was largely confined to surface infrastructure. Furthermore, entrances to two of Iran's nuclear facilities had been sealed off, and some infrastructure had been destroyed or damaged. However, the underground core facilities remained largely intact. Intelligence sources told US media that “the US has only set Iran back by a few months, at most.” Donald Trump dismissed this as fake news. Following Trump’s claim, the CIA chief also stated that extensive damage had been inflicted on the centrifuges at Iran’s nuclear facilities. The IAEA had been monitoring Iran’s nuclear programme. The agency had asked Iran to install CCTV cameras and allow continuous surveillance at the Fordow and Natanz facilities. Following the Israeli and US attacks, Iranian parliament members approved a plan to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. Earlier, the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Commission had approved a draft calling on the government to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. That commission described the IAEA’s report as a pretext for attacks on Iran. According to the non-cooperation plan, activities such as installing monitoring cameras, inspections, and reporting to the agency would be suspended unless the safety of Iran’s nuclear facilities is ensured.

Moreover, Speaker of Iran’s Parliament Mohammad Baqer Ghalibaf said that Iran does not intend to produce nuclear weapons. “The IAEA has failed in its responsibilities. It has become a political instrument,” he said.

The IAEA’s latest report has criticised Iran for its lack of cooperation. The agency had asked Iran to respond to questions about undeclared nuclear facilities and expressed concern about Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile. After Israel began its assault on Iran, the head of the IAEA warned Israel that any attack on a nuclear facility is a violation of international law. According to Article 56 of the Geneva Convention, attacks on a country’s nuclear facilities are prohibited. The IAEA’s website states, “If any country violates this law, it may face international condemnation and legal proceedings.” This means that the Geneva Convention helps ensure accountability for countries' actions during wartime. Meanwhile, observer nations at the UN Security Council also condemned the attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Pakistan’s Permanent Representative to the UN Aamir Iftikhar said at the Security Council meeting, “Such attacks on nuclear facilities under IAEA supervision are clear violations of the IAEA, the UN Security Council provisions, and international human rights law.”

On the other hand, Russia has responded to Iran’s parliamentary decision to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stated during a regular press briefing that attacks on Iran’s nuclear programme had compelled the country to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. The direct consequence of an unprecedented, unprovoked attack on Iran's nuclear facilities is this decision.

In such a situation, the IAEA’s reputation has suffered serious damage. That is why this situation has naturally raised concern. If the preliminary assessment reports—based on US intelligence and cited in American media—are accurate, there will be questions and concerns about what Iran will do next. Will Iran’s nuclear programme accelerate further after repairing the damaged facilities and replacing the killed scientists with new ones, instead of being delayed by Israeli and US airstrikes? That question can now be raised. It will take time to gauge the extent of damage caused by the attacks. At the same time, debate will continue over Israel's claim that Iran is on the brink of producing a nuclear weapon. Iranian officials have already said that their nuclear programme will continue. Although President Trump has said Iran will never again have a nuclear programme, Iranian leaders know that possessing nuclear weapons would protect them from future attacks. Iran’s parliament has passed a bill to suspend cooperation with the IAEA. No representatives voted against the proposal. And, at the same time, no one yet knows what happened to Iran’s uranium.


If the ceasefire holds, international diplomats will try to resume talks for a new agreement. Even though Iran is somewhat weakened, such talks will be difficult. The United States insists that Iran cannot have any uranium enrichment programme on its soil. Iran has always rejected this demand. Everyone knows that North Korea possesses nuclear weapons and, despite pressure to dismantle its nuclear programme, it has never been attacked. Therefore, Iran may also want to develop nuclear weapons as quickly as possible. Because, even under the jurisdiction of the IAEA, Iran has not been able to protect its nuclear facilities from attack.

Author: Researcher and columnist