Iran Nuclear Chief Warns: Ongoing Threats from Adversaries

In a significant update regarding Iran’s nuclear stance, Mohammad Eslami, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI), recently shared his insights with Japan’s Kyodo News agency. The discussions highlighted the ongoing tension in the region and the implications of recent military actions on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

During the interview published on Wednesday, Eslami described the current security landscape as “similar to wartime,” underscoring the threats posed by the Israeli regime’s actions. He elaborated on the devastating consequences of an illegal war launched by Israel in June, which aimed at Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and resulted in significant civilian casualties.

• Approximately 935 individuals, including young children, lost their lives during a 12-day assault targeting various sites.
• The United States joined this military campaign midway, striking critical Iranian nuclear locations.

Eslami pointed out, “This is the first time in history that safeguarded nuclear facilities have come under military attack.” He reiterated Iran’s position that this aggression has compromised its ability to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) as it had in the past. Eslami emphasized the need for “special precautions” before normal inspection activities could resume.

Furthermore, Eslami criticized the IAEA for its role during the aggression, particularly noting that the agency had issued an anti-Iran resolution just before the strikes. This resolution was subsequently leveraged by both Tel Aviv and Washington to justify their military actions against Iran.

Reports leading up to the attacks indicated a troubling level of collaboration between IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi and Israeli officials. An Arabic-language news network, al-Alam TV, disclosed leaked documents suggesting that Grossi had been following directives from Tel Aviv, raising serious concerns about the agency’s neutrality and independence.

In response to the military strikes, the Iranian Parliament (Majlis) passed legislation mandating a suspension of cooperation with the IAEA. Eslami stressed that rebuilding trust with the agency would be essential moving forward.

As a gesture of goodwill, Iran signed an agreement with the IAEA in Cairo on September 9, aimed at resuming cooperation between the two parties. Eslami noted that efforts are underway to fully implement this agreement.

• Iran has resumed limited internal inspections, particularly at the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant.
• The Iranian Parliament, however, remains cautious about potential intelligence leaks that could expose nuclear facilities to further attacks.

In his remarks, Eslami stated, “No country places any issue above its sovereignty and national security,” particularly in light of the ongoing threats and the perceived loss of IAEA independence. He highlighted that Western nations, especially the United States, have exerted pressure on the agency, even threatening to cut funding if member states supported resolutions that criticized Israel during the IAEA’s annual general meeting in Vienna.

Eslami described the IAEA’s failure to condemn the military actions against Iran as an “unforgivable mistake” that would be remembered in history. He urged Grossi to acknowledge the challenges these strikes pose to nuclear safety and the integrity of the safeguard regime.

Finally, Eslami defended Iran’s right to pursue peaceful nuclear energy under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). He emphasized that the obligations associated with inspections should only be valid when accompanied by respect for Iran’s rights.

This ongoing situation reflects a complex interplay of diplomatic relations, regional security, and the global discourse surrounding nuclear energy and weapons. Iran’s position remains firm, advocating for its rights while navigating the challenges posed by external pressures and military threats.

As this narrative unfolds, the international community watches closely, recognizing the potential implications for regional stability and the broader geopolitical landscape.