Regional
U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites set up “cat-and-mouse” hunt for missing uranium
The White House did not respond to a request for comment. The State Department referred Reuters to Trump’s public remarks.
The U.S. and Israeli bombing of Iranian nuclear sites creates a conundrum for U.N. inspectors in Iran: how can you tell if enriched uranium stocks, some of them near weapons grade, were buried beneath the rubble or secretly hidden away?
Following last weekend’s attacks on three of Iran’s top nuclear sites – at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan – President Donald Trump said the facilities had been “obliterated” by U.S. munitions, including bunker-busting bombs.
But the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors Tehran’s nuclear program, has said it’s unclear exactly what damage was sustained at Fordow, a plant buried deep inside a mountain that produced the bulk of Iran’s most highly enriched uranium.
IAEA chief Rafael Grossi said on Monday it was highly likely the sensitive centrifuges used to enrich uranium inside Fordow were badly damaged. It’s far less clear whether Iran’s 9 tonnes of enriched uranium – more than 400 kg of it enriched to close to weapons grade – were destroyed.
Western governments are scrambling to determine what’s become of it.
Reuters spoke to more than a dozen current and former officials involved in efforts to contain Iran’s nuclear program who said the bombing may have provided the perfect cover for Iran to make its uranium stockpiles disappear and any IAEA investigation would likely be lengthy and arduous.
Olli Heinonen, previously the IAEA’s top inspector from 2005 to 2010, said the search will probably involve complicated recovery of materials from damaged buildings as well as forensics and environmental sampling, which take a long time.
“There could be materials which are inaccessible, distributed under the rubble or lost during the bombing,” said Heinonen, who dealt extensively with Iran while at the IAEA and now works at the Stimson Center think-tank in Washington.
Iran’s more than 400 kg of uranium enriched to up to 60% purity – a short step from the roughly 90% of weapons grade – are enough, if enriched further, for nine nuclear weapons, according to an IAEA yardstick.
Even a fraction of that left unaccounted for would be a grave concern for Western powers that believe Iran is at least keeping the option of nuclear weapons open.
There are indications Iran may have moved some of its enriched uranium before it could be struck.
IAEA chief Grossi said Iran informed him on June 13, the day of Israel’s first attacks, that it was taking measures to protect its nuclear equipment and materials. While it did not elaborate, he said that suggests it was moved.
A Western diplomat involved in the dossier, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the issue, said most of the enriched uranium at Fordow would appear to have been moved days in advance of the attacks, “almost as if they knew it was coming”.
Some experts have said a line of vehicles including trucks visible on satellite imagery outside Fordow before it was hit suggests enriched uranium there was moved elsewhere, though U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Thursday said he was unaware of any intelligence suggesting Iran had moved it.
Trump has also dismissed such concerns. In an interview due to air on Sunday with Fox News Channel’s “Sunday Morning Futures”, he insisted the Iranians “didn’t move anything.”
“It’s very dangerous to do. It is very heavy – very, very heavy. It’s a very hard thing to do,” Trump said. “Plus we didn’t give much notice because they didn’t know we were coming until just, you know, then.”
The White House did not respond to a request for comment. The State Department referred Reuters to Trump’s public remarks.
A second Western diplomat said it would be a major challenge to verify the condition of the uranium stockpile, citing a long list of past disputes between the IAEA and Tehran, including Iran’s failure to credibly explain uranium traces found at undeclared sites.
“It’ll be a game of cat and mouse.”
Iran says it has fulfilled all its obligations towards the watchdog.
Before Israel launched its 12-day military campaign aimed at destroying Iran’s nuclear and missile capabilities, the IAEA had regular access to Iran’s enrichment sites and monitored what was inside them around the clock as part of the 191-nation Non-Proliferation Treaty aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons, to which Iran is a party.
Now, rubble and ash blur the picture.
What’s more, Iran has threatened to stop working with the IAEA. Furious at the non-proliferation regime’s failure to protect it from strikes many countries see as unlawful, Iran’s parliament voted on Wednesday to suspend cooperation.
Tehran says a resolution this month passed by the IAEA’s 35-nation Board of Governors declaring Iran in breach of its non-proliferation obligations paved the way for Israel’s attacks, which began the next day, by providing an element of diplomatic cover. The IAEA denies that.
Iran has repeatedly denied that it has an active program to develop a nuclear bomb. And U.S. intelligence – dismissed by Trump before the airstrikes – had said there was no evidence Tehran was taking steps toward developing one.
However, experts say there is no reason for enriching uranium to 60% for a civilian nuclear program, which can run on less than 5% enrichment.
As a party to the NPT, Iran must account for its stock of enriched uranium. The IAEA then has to verify Iran’s account by means including inspections, but its powers are limited – it inspects Iran’s declared nuclear facilities but cannot carry out snap inspections at undeclared locations.
Iran has an unknown number of extra centrifuges stored at locations the U.N. nuclear watchdog is unaware of, the IAEA has said, with which it might be able to set up a new or secret enrichment site.
That makes hunting down the material that can be enriched further, particularly that closest to bomb grade, all the more important.
“Iran’s stockpile of 60% enriched uranium may not have been part of the ‘mission’ but it is a significant part of the proliferation risk – particularly if centrifuges are unaccounted for,” Kelsey Davenport of the Washington-based Arms Control Association said on X on Friday.
The IAEA can and does receive intelligence from member states, which include the United States and Israel, but says it takes nothing at face value and independently verifies tip-offs.
Having pummelled the sites housing the uranium, Israel and the U.S. are seen as the countries most likely to accuse Iran of hiding it or restarting enrichment, officials say.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office did not respond to a request for comment for this story.
U.N. inspectors’ futile hunt for large caches of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which preceded the U.S.-led invasion in 2003, showed the enormous difficulty of verifying foreign powers’ assertions about hidden stockpiles of material when there is little tangible information to go on.
As in Iraq, inspectors could end up chasing shadows.
“If the Iranians come clean with the 400 kg of HEU (highly enriched uranium) then the problem is manageable, but if they don’t then nobody will ever be sure what happened to it,” a third Western diplomat said.
The IAEA, which answers to 180 member states, has said it cannot guarantee Iran’s nuclear development is entirely peaceful, but has no credible indications of a coordinated weapons program.
The U.S. this week backed the IAEA’s verification and monitoring work and urged Tehran to ensure its inspectors in the country are safe.
It is a long journey from there to accounting for every gram of enriched uranium, the IAEA’s standard.
The above-ground plant at Natanz, the smaller of the two facilities enriching uranium up to 60 percent, was flattened in the strikes, the IAEA said, suggesting a small portion of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile may have been destroyed.
Fordow, Iran’s most deeply buried enrichment plant, which was producing the bulk of 60%-enriched uranium, was first seriously hit last weekend when the United States dropped its biggest conventional bombs on it. The damage to its underground halls is unclear.
An underground area in Isfahan where much of Iran’s most highly enriched uranium was stored was also bombed, causing damage to the tunnel entrances leading to it.
The agency has not been able to carry out inspections since Israel’s bombing campaign began, leaving the outside world with more questions than answers.
Grossi said on Wednesday the conditions at the bombed sites would make it difficult for IAEA inspectors to work there – suggesting it could take time. “There is rubble, there could be unexploded ordnance,” he said.
Heinonen, the former chief IAEA inspector, said it was vital the agency be transparent in real time about what its inspectors have been able to verify independently, including any uncertainties, and what remained unknown.
“Member states can then make their own risk assessments,” he said.
Regional
Iran ties Hormuz reopening to US concessions on several demands
Araqchi said reopening the strait would depend in part on the U.S. paying compensation for damage it caused in widespread attacks on Iran.
Iran said it was nearing a final pact with Oman defining new shipping lanes between them through the Strait of Hormuz but repeated that the U.S. must meet other conditions, including compensation and an end to sanctions and military threats, before the strategic waterway is reopened.
A U.S. official told Reuters on Friday that Iran and Oman were close to a deal that could pave the way for restoring safe passage through the strait, a major conduit for oil and gas shipping before Iran blocked Hormuz in response to U.S. and Israeli attacks on Tehran that began in late February, Reuters reported.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on Sunday an agreement with Oman on the strait was in its “final stages” but reiterated comments made on Saturday that Tehran would not reopen the channel unless the U.S. met certain demands made by Tehran.
The deal with Iran would set out the new shipping lanes to be used once the U.S. fulfils those conditions and the strait is reopened, Iran’s Mehr news agency quoted him as saying.
Iran and the U.S. are not engaged in direct talks, and Tehran will not start them as long as Washington breaches an interim deal signed in June, Araqchi said, adding that messages were being exchanged through intermediaries.
U.S. President Donald Trump said in an interview with Axios that the U.S. was “low-keying” it with Iran. “We are only semi-negotiating with them. We are just watching Iran with its huge inflation and the fact they have no money.”
CONDITIONS INCLUDE COMPENSATION
Araqchi said reopening the strait would depend in part on the U.S. paying compensation for damage it caused in widespread attacks on Iran.
The secretary of Iran’s top national security body, Mohammad Baqer Zolqadr, also listed ending further U.S. threats against Iran; halting aggression toward Iran and its Lebanese, Palestinian, Yemeni and Iraqi allies; removing a U.S. naval blockade in the Gulf; lifting sanctions on Iran; and releasing frozen Iranian assets.
The United States and Israel launched air strikes on Iran more than five months ago. Trump has said the attacks were aimed at keeping the Islamic Republic from developing nuclear weapons and degrading its ability to threaten the region.
Washington and Tehran agreed to a ceasefire in June, but the U.S. reimposed a blockade on Iranian shipping in the Gulf in July, a move that Tehran said violated the truce, which by then had already broken down.
“Once the deal is announced to restore commercial shipping without impediments, the United States will lift the blockade of Iranian ports,” the U.S. official told Reuters on condition of anonymity.
U.S. actions would be tied to Iran’s implementation of its commitments, the official said.
The U.S. comments indicated delicate sequencing toward a deal that sources had told Reuters appeared to be set to give Tehran control over vessel traffic entering the Gulf through the strait, which shippers have said was not easily workable.
The United Arab Emirates said on Saturday that Iran had attacked a ship affiliated with its state oil company. There was no immediate comment from Iran, whose Revolutionary Guard Corps previously has attacked ships that it said tried to cross the strait without Iranian permission.
HOUTHI ATTACKS
Iranian strikes on Strait of Hormuz shipping have been coupled with increased attacks by its Yemen-based allies, the Houthi rebels, who have targeted ships at another oil chokepoint on the other side of the Arabian Peninsula between the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.
The Houthis also declared a naval blockade against Saudi Arabia in the Red Sea last month in response to what they said was a Saudi siege on them in Yemen, an allegation denied by Riyadh, which backs Yemen’s internationally recognised government.
The Yemeni rebel group said they had attacked Saudi Aramco’s Jazan refinery on Sunday, two days after the kingdom signed a defence pact with Sunni Muslim allies Turkey and Pakistan in response to growing regional instability from the U.S.-Israeli war on Shi’ite Iran.
The Saudi energy ministry said a fire had broken out at the refinery but was later extinguished with no injuries, without giving a cause.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said the new alliance was not directed against Iran or any other country, but rather served as a general pledge to support security.
Fighting has escalated between the Houthis and government forces in Yemen, with the Yemeni military on Monday saying seven people including military personnel and civilians were killed in a Houthi attack on the Red Sea port city of Mocha.
Air defences intercepted and shot down 11 Houthi drones that participated in the attack, the military said.
Regional
Turkey, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia defence pact technically same as NATO’s Article 5, Turkish minister says
Fidan also said Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan wanted to see the alliance expand, and that Egypt was a potential candidate to join, among others.
A defence pact signed between Turkey, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia is technically the same as NATO’s Article 5 mutual defence agreement, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said on Saturday, adding the accord was not targeting Iran.
Fidan also said Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan wanted to see the alliance expand, and that Egypt was a potential candidate to join, among others.
The regional powers signed the “Mecca Joint Defence Agreement” on Friday, wedding Sunni Muslim U.S. allies alarmed at a regional conflagration that has brought Iranian missile fire onto Gulf oil exporters.
In a joint statement, they said the accord intended to strengthen collective deterrence against any act of aggression and stipulates that an armed attack against any of the three would be regarded as an attack on all.
Speaking to the state-run Anadolu news agency, Fidan said the new alliance was not directed against Iran or any other country, but rather served as a general pledge to support the three allies’ security.
He added that the allies would decide through consultations what degree, form, and format of support they would ask for in the event of an attack, but that no country would be considered a threat as long as a member state is not attacked.
Turkey, which has NATO’s second-largest army, has said the pact was open to expansion to other regional countries and did not seek to replace any existing alliances.
“NATO is a giant military alliance where there are 32 countries. We have started here as three countries and we have to take very humble but concrete steps,” he said, adding efforts to finalise the pact had been underway for two years and eight months.
He added that a committee of ministers similar to that within NATO would be formed as part of the alliance, as well as a general secretariat based in Saudi Arabia, but that operational details would be set at the first committee meeting.
“Our president’s vision is that we don’t remain limited to three countries, that we grow and bring together all (regional) countries under this roof,” he said, adding Egypt could potentially join the pact once certain technical matters are resolved.
In recent months, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Egypt formed a group to address regional issues, namely the war on Iran. Turkey has said the group – dubbed the R4 – aims to solidify its partnership through concrete mechanisms.
Fidan also said Turkey should be involved in an international coalition to protect shipping in the Red Sea from Houthi attacks because shipping safety concerned Ankara’s interests.
Regional
Goods transporters to go on strike from Saturday after talks with Pakistan govt fail
However, the minister has assured the transporters that he would discuss their demands, and the next round of talks would be held on Monday morning.
Goods transporters and oil tanker operators began suspending their services on Friday night after negotiations with the Pakistani government failed, ahead of their nationwide wheel-jam strike scheduled for Saturday.
All Pakistan Goods Transport Itehad spokesman and All Pakistan Goods Transport Owners Association President Mohammad Owais Chaudhry Advocate told Dawn that talks with Federal Minister for Communications Aleem Khan and other government officials had failed.
He said the negotiations ended without a breakthrough, prompting transporters, including edible oil tanker operators, petroleum oil tanker operators, truckers, trailer operators and other intercity transporters, to proceed with their previously announced strike.
“We have informed the government side about the problems we are facing and our concerns,” Chaudhry said, adding that the strike would continue until their demands were accepted.
However, the minister has assured the transporters that he would discuss their demands, and the next round of talks would be held on Monday morning.
The unified body of transporters had already announced that it would begin its wheel-jam strike from August 8, and warned that it would not be a token strike but an indefinite one.
“Commercial goods carriers across the country have already been taken off the roads and will remain stationed at designated places during the protest period,” Chaudhry said.
Among the key demands of the transporters is the uniform enforcement of axle-load limits across the country and permission for 10-wheel vehicles to carry up to 35 tonnes.
They have also demanded reductions in diesel prices and toll taxes, besides seeking relief in withholding tax to ease the financial burden on the transport sector.
The transporters have also called for the withdrawal of customs provisions that, according to the association, allow authorities to confiscate vehicles carrying goods found to be in violation of customs laws.
Other demands include the withdrawal of the Punjab Highway Patrol’s powers to issue challans to commercial vehicles, an end to what the association described as unnecessary challans and excessive fines on motorways and highways, and measures to facilitate the issuance of heavy transport vehicle licences to drivers.
-
Sport5 days agoAfghanistan holds Russia to 3-3 draw, earns first point at Continental Futsal Championship
-
Regional3 days agoGoods transporters to go on strike from Saturday after talks with Pakistan govt fail
-
Sport3 days agoRashid Khan takes six as Afghanistan thrash Ireland by 92 runs
-
Sport2 days agoAfghanistan secure direct qualification for 2027 Men’s ODI World Cup
-
Business5 days agoUzbekistan’s Fergana region strengthens economic ties with Afghanistan
-
Regional5 days agoIran threatens to hit Gulf states if US launches new strikes
-
World3 days agoUS Senate passes Russia sanctions championed by Graham; US House next
-
Latest News2 days agoPakistan-backed armed groups in Balochistan using former Afghan government forces: report
