Skip to main content

Safeguards at Iran's bombed nuclear facilities

On Jan 23, 2026, Reuters published the response of Mohammad Eslami, Iran’s atomic chief, to the remark by IAEA DG Rafael Grossi in Davos ⁠on January 20 that the standoff ‌over inspections at bombed facilities at Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan "cannot go on forever", saying that IAEA has not formally outlined "a specific protocol" ‍for inspecting the damaged facilities: "When a military strike occurs and there are environmental risks, it must be defined and a guideline must be designed." 
        Here is a proposed approach. 
        Iran’s NPT safeguards agreement, based on INFCIRC/153, addresses the current situation where facilities in Iran containing safeguarded nuclear material have been bombed. Involved are special reports by Iran, special inspections by IAEA, and innovative application of safeguards measures. 

        1. Iran must make special reports to the IAEA (INFCIRC/153, paragraph 68). 
        2. IAEA should notify Iran of its intention to make special inspections (INFCIRC/153, paragraph 73). 
        3. IAEA should consult with Iran to obtain access for special inspections (INFCIRC/153, paragraph 77). 
        4. Where access to nuclear material for material accountancy is not granted by Iran, IAEA should make use of the complementary measures of containment and surveillance, (INFCIRC/153, paragraph 29). That might require continuous presence of inspectors. 

         INFCIRC/153, para 68, Special reports….the State shall make special reports without delay: (a) If any unusual incident or circumstances lead the State to believe that there is or may have been loss of nuclear material… (b) if the containment has been unexpectedly changed …to the extent that unauthorized removal of nuclear material has become possible. I
        NFCIRC/153, para 73, Purposes of inspections…the Agency may make special inspections subject to the procedures laid down in paragraph 77: (a) In order to verify the information contained in special reports; or (b) If the Agency considers that the information made available by the State…is not adequate for the Agency to fulfill its responsibilities under the Agreement. I
        NFCIRC/153, para 77, Access for inspections…in circumstances that may lead to. special inspections…the State and the Agency shall consult forthwith. As a result of those consultations the Agency may make inspections in addition to the routine inspection effort…and may obtain access in agreement with the State to information or locations in addition to the access…for ad hoc and routine inspections. Any disagreements concerning the need for additional access shall be resolved in accordance with paragraphs 21 and 22 (Settlement of Disputes); in case action by the State is essential and urgent, paragraph 18 (Measures in relation to verification of non-diversion) shall apply. 
        INFCIRC/153, para 29, Objective of safeguards. … provide for the use of material accountancy as a measure of fundamental importance, with containment and surveillance as important complementary measures.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

‘New war with Israel at any moment’, ‘still digging through rubble’

The news about Iran has taken an ominous tone in the last couple days. Here is some reporting and commentary.  Newsweek on August 18, 2025, reported that Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior military adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, said ‘ We are not in a ceasefire; we are in a stage of war. No protocol, regulation, or agreement has been written between us and the U.S. or Israel. A new war with Israel could break out at any moment .’  Yonah Jeremy Bob commented in The Jerusalem Post on August 19, 2025, that ‘ Khamenei can either “drink from the poisoned chalice” of diplomatic concessions … or face more airstrikes, possibly next time some targeting him directly ’.   Bob also noted that ‘ right now Iran is still digging through rubbl e’. The U.S. attacked Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan on June 22. Two months of digging. No surprise that there has been no public news about that.

Assessing possible outcomes of the snapback mechanism

The initiation by the E3 of the 30-day snapback mechanism in the UN Security Council makes everything more difficult and there is great uncertainty about the outcome. Will it be peaceful with a new nuclear deal with Iran, negotiated by the U.S., endorsed by the UNSC and verified by IAEA, or will Iran withdraw from NPT with further military action by Israel and the U.S.?                 To perhaps shed a little light on what the outcome will be, here is my analysis of how the players - Iran, U.S. and E3 - may be assessing the acceptability of the range of outcomes. Four levels of acceptability were used: 1 Fully acceptable; 2 Less acceptable; 3 Just acceptable; and 4 Not acceptable. Four near term 30-day outcomes are listed, and two optimistic outcomes with an interim U.S.-Iran agreement reached within a 6-month extension.                 For the 30-day near term, the best outcome would b...

U.S. Sanctions, Middle East views

Trump’s special envoy Witkoff has hit the capitals again; in Tel Aviv Netanyahu probably told him to tell Trump that he will take over all of Gaza; in Moscow Putin probably told him to tell Trump that Ukraine will be destroyed and forget the sanctions. Witkoff didn’t get to number 3 on his list, Iran. But Trump played another ‘ getting to a deal ’ with Iran card, adding sanctions he can later get credit for removing. And the Middle East commentators are worriedly reacting to the Iran situation. Here are some highlights.  From Newsweek:       The U.S. announced on July 30 the largest Iran-related sanctions since 2018 , targeting entities and vessels linked to the country's petroleum sector: 20 oil firms, 5 vessel management companies, 1 wholesaler, and over 115 individuals in 17 countries and regions, including the U.K., Italy, Switzerland, India, the UAE and Hong Kong.       U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said: "Today's Depar...