Amid the continued military aggression by Israel and the United States against Iran, a series of attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities—facilities that are under the full supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)—have been reported.
According to the AEOI, on various dates, including March 1, 2026, and March 21, 2026, the Shahid Ahmadi Roshan enrichment complex in Natanz was targeted. The Ardakan yellowcake production plant in Yazd Province and the Khondab heavy water complex in Arak were also among the sites struck. Meanwhile, the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant has reportedly been hit by projectiles several times during the course of these confrontations.
Based on official AEOI statements, technical reports and safety assessments indicate that none of these attacks resulted in any leakage of radioactive materials beyond the facilities, and there has been no danger to residents in surrounding areas.
In the course of this joint military aggression by Israel and the United States, the inaction of the International Atomic Energy Agency has persisted. The Agency has refrained from carrying out even its most basic responsibility—formally condemning attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities and convening an emergency meeting of its Board of Governors.
Accordingly, Mohammad Eslami, head of the AEOI, sent formal letters of protest to the Director General, warning that such a historic failure would erode what little credibility remains for the Agency.
In light of these attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the technical measures undertaken by the Organization to prevent any potential release of nuclear materials, as well as the stance of the IAEA and its Director General Rafael Grossi, we spoke with Behrouz Kamalvandi, Deputy Head and Spokesperson of the AEOI.
No contamination or increase in radiation levels has been observed outside Natanz and Ardakan facilities
During the ongoing conflict, as in the previous twelve-day war, we are witnessing attacks by the United States and the Israeli regime on Iran’s nuclear facilities. So far, strikes on the Bushehr power plant, Natanz facilities, and the Ardakan yellowcake production plant in Yazd Province have been reported. Given public concern over possible leaks, what measures had the Organization put in place in advance to protect the public, and what is the current safety status at these facilities?
“Yes, as you noted, during the past two conflicts—the twelve-day war and the Ramadan war—various nuclear facilities in the country have been subjected to unlawful military attacks by the Zionist regime and the United States. In terms of safety and the protection of people and the environment, extensive measures had been designed and implemented to reduce these risks to the minimum possible level.
As you are aware, immediately after each attack, the Organization’s Nuclear Safety Center—a specialized technical body—has provided the necessary updates to our dear nation. The aggressor struck the grounds of the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant on four occasions with projectiles; however, there were no casualties, no significant damage, and no spread of radioactive materials.
With regard to Natanz and Ardakan facilities, fortunately, no contamination or increase in radiation levels has been observed outside the sites. Nevertheless, these acts of aggression, in clear violation of international principles and rules—including various United Nations Security Council resolutions, as well as resolutions of the IAEA Board of Governors and General Conference—have regrettably not been condemned by the Security Council, the Board of Governors, the Agency, or even the Director General himself.
The Director General, in his most recent remarks following repeated attacks on the Bushehr plant, merely expressed concern, stating that such facilities should not be targeted and calling for what he termed restraint.
Through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, we have warned regional countries about the consequences and dangers of the continuation of these aggressions, and have urged them to act to prevent a humanitarian and environmental disaster for Iran and the region, including their own countries.
Unfortunately, the Zionist regime and the United States have violated all international laws and principles in these aggressions and have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. Countries around the world have a duty to take a firm stance against these unlawful and inhumane actions and not allow further erosion of international norms and laws.”
IAEA inaction amounts to clear complicity with perpetrators / Iran has sent 12 letters to the agency
Has the Atomic Energy Organization reported these attacks to the Agency, and what technical process is followed to document and present such reports?
“Yes, the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, both prior to the first attack and following each instance of aggression against our country’s nuclear facilities, has—alongside the efforts of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs—sent multiple letters to the Director General of the Agency. These communications have outlined the incidents, explained their legal dimensions, and highlighted their inconsistency with international law, including various UN Security Council resolutions, as well as resolutions of the IAEA Board of Governors and General Conference, while calling for action by the Director General and the Board.
Before the onset of the twelve-day war, the Organization had already warned the Agency, through formal correspondence, about threats by the Zionist regime against Iran’s safeguarded peaceful nuclear facilities.
It should be noted that during the twelve-day war and the current conflict, the Organization has sent 12 letters to the Agency, emphasizing its inaction—particularly that of the Director General—regarding its statutory responsibilities. This inaction has been described as a form of clear complicity with perpetrators, a collusion that will be recorded in history and further undermine the Agency’s credibility.
Unfortunately, due to the significant political influence of Western countries over the Board of Governors and the Director General—particularly the latter’s biased positions—these requests have not yielded the desired outcome. However, the support of some independent countries, notably the Russian Federation and China, enabled our positions to be expressed during the only emergency session convened by the Board. Nonetheless, due to the political influence of European countries and the United States, no effective deterrent action was taken. Meanwhile, the Organization is vigorously pursuing legal action at both the international and domestic levels.”
At minimum, Grossi should call for an emergency meeting of the Board of Governors
Rafael Grossi has stated that the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant is operational and contains a large quantity of nuclear material, warning that damage to it could lead to a major radiological incident affecting a wide region. Have there been regional consultations on this issue? Have any joint measures been taken?
“Yes, after repeated correspondence and follow-up by this Organization and our Permanent Mission in Vienna, the Director General has finally made such statements. However, from our perspective, this is not sufficient.
At a minimum, Iran expects the Director General, in line with his statutory responsibilities, to condemn any aggression against safeguarded nuclear facilities, to call for an emergency meeting of the Board of Governors, and to present a detailed technical report outlining the illegality of such actions and their dangerous consequences for people and the environment—thereby helping prevent their continuation.
Instead, through entirely political and one-sided interviews, he appears to be exerting pressure on Iran—effectively aligning himself with the perpetrators. We have reiterated this point in multiple communications.
In such circumstances, the least he could do would be to call an emergency session of the Board. However, after repeated requests from Iran, he declined, citing the pretext that Iran is not a member of the Board—despite the fact that convening such meetings falls within his mandate. Ultimately, Russia requested the session. Russia has also called for a technical briefing on the consequences of attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, but the Agency has so far delayed convening it. Iran and Russia are currently pursuing its prompt organization.
That said, there is little expectation that such a meeting would yield meaningful results. As noted, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is engaged in consultations with regional and neighboring countries regarding the risks and consequences of continued aggression for the region’s population and environment.”
Grossi’s fulfillment of his duties could have created deterrence against further attacks
This round of attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities has again been marked by IAEA inaction, with the Director General refraining from directly condemning the perpetrators. What is the Organization’s position, and what actions has Iran’s mission in Vienna taken?
“The inaction you refer to is not limited to recent attacks. Unfortunately, both the Director General and the Agency were passive even before the previous round of attacks—the twelve-day war—despite Iran’s formal warnings. Had appropriate action been taken at that time, it might have created a degree of deterrence and prevented earlier attacks, let alone the current aggression.
This inaction, which amounts to implicit support for the aggressors—as we have noted in our registered correspondence—has encouraged them to continue their unlawful actions. Both the Board of Governors and the Director General have fallen short, and we are pursuing accountability for the perpetrators, enablers, and those who have encouraged these aggressions, both internationally and domestically.
There is ample legal documentation to substantiate these acts as war crimes and crimes against humanity. If international bodies demonstrate the necessary will, they can uphold legal order; otherwise, the law of the jungle will prevail. Comprehensive documentation has also been prepared for domestic legal proceedings, and the necessary correspondence has been undertaken.”
We strongly protested the Director General’s biased language encouraging a nuclear strike on Iran
Mr. Grossi recently suggested that the only way to contain Iran’s nuclear program would be a nuclear strike. What formal objections have been raised?
“Regrettably, the Director General, continuing his politically biased statements—contrary to his statutory duties—has now made one of the most egregious remarks to date. His reference to Iran’s nuclear ‘ambitions’—a non-professional and non-neutral characterization—and his suggestion that they could only be eliminated through a ‘nuclear war,’ whether intentional or not, constitutes further clear evidence, from Iran’s perspective, that the Agency and its Director General are under the political influence of Western countries, the United States, and the Zionist regime.
His statements in international media regarding Iran’s nuclear issue not only fall outside the framework of professional neutrality expected of the head of an international organization, but also reflect a one-sided approach. For instance, in a June 9, 2025 interview with Israel’s I24 network, he stated that affecting Iran’s underground facilities, such as Fordow, would require ‘a very, very devastating force.’ In response, the Atomic Energy Organization formally lodged a strong protest against this biased language and called on him to fulfill his professional and statutory duties rather than adopt political and one-sided positions.
When it becomes clear that the individual responsible for overseeing countries’ commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is himself suggesting the use of nuclear weapons, it reveals a deeply troubling state of affairs within international institutions, particularly the IAEA. We have documented these matters and are pursuing them through the Agency, while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has also taken positions at the level of its Deputy for Legal and International Affairs and is following up through international mechanisms.
Observing these realities reinforces the need to place less reliance on such international organizations and to focus instead on reforming these unjust mechanisms, while strengthening reliance on national capabilities, public support, and the country’s armed forces.”
NOURNEWS