NCEM joins IAEA-led exercise to test nuclear crisis response
Muscat – National Emergency Management Centre (NCEM) participated in ConvEx-3, a large-scale international nuclear emergency exercise coordinated by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and hosted virtually by Romania.
The two-day simulation, which concluded on Wednesday, was designed to test global readiness in the event of a radiological crisis. The exercise simulated a severe radiological leak at Romania's Cernavodă Nuclear Power Plant and involved more than 75 countries and ten international organisations.
The drill assessed emergency preparedness through a series of complex scenarios and evaluated response mechanisms at national and international levels. Oman's participation involved several agencies under NCEM, with a focus on enhancing coordination, testing alert systems and enhancing inter-agency communication during a nuclear emergency.
NCEM stated that the exercise supported national efforts to align with international best practices, improve emergency procedures, and reinforce the country's ability to respond to radiological threats swiftly and effectively.
Rafael Mariano Grossi, Director General of IAEA, said the exercise demonstrated the global community's shared commitment to safety. 'This exercise was a clear demonstration of the international community's commitment to protect people and the environment by working together, across borders and systems, when every minute counts.'
Cantemir Ciurea-Ercău, President of Romania's National Commission for Nuclear Activities Control, noted that hosting the exercise highlighted Romania's longstanding commitment to nuclear safety. 'In today's interconnected world, effective preparedness must transcend borders – this exercise reflected our shared commitment to safety, cooperation and transparency,' he said.
ConvEx-3 was the largest simulation of its kind conducted by IAEA and was part of efforts to strengthen global nuclear and radiological emergency preparedness through collaboration and regular testing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times of Oman
2 days ago
- Times of Oman
India's oil import from Iran "depends on market factors, prevailing global situation": MEA
New Delhi: The Ministry of External Affairs clarified India's position on importing crude oil from Iran on thursday, stating that energy purchases are based on "market factors and the prevailing global situation." "Our energy requirements, or the energy purchases we make, are based on market factors and the prevailing global situation," MEA spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said in THEIR weekly briefing. Further, the Ministry also expressed deep concerns about the situation in West Asia, including the Israeli attacks on nuclear scientists and certain universities in Iran. In response to a question about targeting science students and scientists, the MEA spokesperson emphasised India's commitment to peace and diplomacy. "As you would have seen in our statement earlier as well, we expressed deep concerns about the recent escalation of the situation in West Asia, including the attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities. Subsequently, we have welcomed the ceasefire, as you would have seen," Jaiswal stated. The MEA spokesperson noted that India is closely monitoring updates from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regarding the radiation levels at the affected sites. "India is closely following updates from the IAEA about the radiation levels in the affected sites," the spokesperson said. "We have noted that so far, IAEA has reported that the targeted facilities either confirmed no nuclear material or small quantities of natural or low-enriched uranium, and that radioactive contamination has been limited to the buildings affected by the strikes. We urge a return to the path of dialogue and diplomacy for an early restoration of regional peace, security, and stability," Jaiswal affirmed.
Observer
2 days ago
- Observer
Iran n-bomb? More likely
Israel and the United States have dealt punishing blows to Iran's nuclear infrastructure. 'Operation Rising Lion' and 'Operation Midnight Hammer' have been portrayed as precision strikes that will stop the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme in its tracks. But whatever the bombings might have achieved tactically, they risk forfeiting strategically, as Iran is now more convinced than ever that nuclear weapons are the only way to deter future aggression and ensure the regime's survival. Iran was once brought to the negotiating table through a carefully calibrated mix of pressure and incentives. Despite its imperfections, that approach worked. In 2015, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action was agreed, with Iran agreeing to limit its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief and other concessions. But — at Israel's urging and despite Iran's apparent compliance — Donald Trump abandoned the JCPOA during his first term as president, destroying whatever mutual trust had been built over the course of 20 months of painstaking diplomacy. Now, despite pursuing new nuclear negotiations with Iran, the US has joined Israel in abandoning strategic patience in favor of spasmodic force. Some argue that Iran invited the attacks by deceiving the international community, stoking regional conflicts, and enriching uranium to levels well beyond those needed for any civilian application. These are legitimate complaints. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in a report released just before Israel's campaign began, raised concerns about Iran's compliance with its international obligations. Indeed, an analysis of this report by the Institute for Science and International Security argued that 'Iran can convert its current stock of 60 per cent enriched uranium into 233 kg of [weapon-grade uranium] in three weeks at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP), enough for 9 nuclear weapons.' That conclusion may well have lit a fire under the Trump administration. But the IAEA also concluded that it had 'no credible indications of an ongoing, undeclared structured nuclear programme' in Iran, while underscoring the urgency of reaching a nuclear deal. 'Iran,' the agency warned, 'is the only non-nuclear-weapon state in the world that is producing and accumulating uranium enriched to 60 per cent' — just a short technical step away from the 90 per cent purity needed for weapons-grade material. Even so, US and Israeli decision-makers green-lit attacks on Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan — facilities that are subject to IAEA safeguards and monitored under Iran's Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) commitments. With that, they unravelled the legal and verification framework that exists precisely to prevent weaponisation. Beyond undermining the authority of the IAEA and its inspection regime, the attacks violated the NPT's principle of peaceful nuclear use (Article IV) and breached international law, including the United Nations Charter. The US, a nuclear superpower with a record of catastrophic wars aimed at regime change, and Israel, a clandestine nuclear-armed state that refuses to sign the NPT, have thus sent an unmistakable message: only the weak follow rules, and only the strong are safe. In fact, as long as you have nuclear weapons, you can violate international law at will. This is true not only for major powers, but also for smaller states. Pakistan, for example, nurtures cross-border terrorism and exports proxy war with impunity, threatening nuclear retaliation for anyone who crosses it. This poses a more acute threat to regional peace than Iran's hypothetical bomb, but the US remains silent. This hypocrisy is deeply rooted. It was the US, after all, that aided and abetted Pakistan's covert pursuit of the bomb. Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, successive US administrations ignored mounting evidence that Pakistan was secretly enriching uranium and building nuclear weapons – and continued funneling billions of dollars in aid to the country. The result is a fragile state armed with an 'Islamic bomb.' Today, with diplomacy derailed, inspections discredited, coercion normalised, and double standards embraced, what tools remain to convince Iran that remaining non-nuclear is wise and strategically viable? After years of debate over the value of a nuclear deterrent — with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei even issuing religious edicts against nuclear weapons — Iranian decision-makers are almost certain to decide that there is no other way to keep the country safe from attack. Iran now has every incentive to exit — or at least limit — the IAEA framework and race toward nuclear breakout. Just as Saddam Hussein took his nuclear programme underground following Israel's 1981 bombing of Iraq's IAEA-monitored Osirak reactor, Iran is likely to reject transparency and oversight in favor of secrecy and ambiguity. That would not be some dramatic act of defiance, but rather a rational response to a serious — even existential — threat. And it is not just Iran. If powerful states can bomb safeguarded nuclear facilities with impunity, why should any country put its faith in the global nonproliferation regime? Any government that wants to avoid the fate of Saddam's Iraq or Muammar el Qaddafi's Libya (or, for that matter, democratic Ukraine), will seek to acquire the bomb – or at least come close enough to keep adversaries guessing. The only viable path to nonproliferation is and always will be diplomacy, not destruction. Military strikes might slow down a nuclear programme, but they cannot impose long-term restraint — especially when they are carried out by powers that flout the very rules they claim to be enforcing. In the end, Operation Rising Lion and Operation Midnight Hammer may be remembered not as preemptive strikes against Iran's nuclear breakout, but as catalysts for it. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2025. By Brahma Chellaney A Professor Emeritus of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and Fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin
Observer
2 days ago
- Observer
Iran one step closer to cutting cooperation with IAEA
TEHRAN: Iran has taken one further step towards cutting off its cooperation with the United Nations' atomic watchdog, as Tehran takes stock in the aftermath of its brief war with Israel. The Guardian Council, a key supervisory body, on Thursday approved the temporary suspension of cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), state news agency IRNA reported, a day after the measure was passed in parliament. According to the resolution, Iran will not allow IAEA inspectors into the country until the "safety" of its nuclear facilities is guaranteed. Tehran is also asking the IAEA to condemn the attacks by the US and Israel on Iran's nuclear facilities. Without ongoing cooperation with the IAEA, which is mandated to monitor nuclear facilities in countries around the world, there is little prospect of negotiations with the US resuming. US President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday that there would be new talks with Iran next week - a comment that has not brought any official response from Tehran so far. Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Thursday that Israel was hit hard by the conflict, in his first public comments since a ceasefire came into force earlier this week. "Despite all the fanfares and claims, the Zionist regime was nearly destroyed and crushed under the blows of the Islamic Republic," Khamenei said in a video message cited by IRNA. An excavator is used to clear the rubble in front of a building recently hit in Israeli strikes in Tehran following a ceasefire with Israel that ended 12 days of fighting. - AFP Iran had also achieved "victory over the American regime," he said, arguing that the US had failed to achieve its objectives. He praised "the extraordinary unity and solidarity of the Iranian people." Iran suffered major attacks on its nuclear and military facilities during the war which began on June 13, as well as losing many top scientists and military leaders in Israeli strikes. The US also intervened on Israel's behalf with a strike on Iranian nuclear sites at the weekend. Some two dozen people were killed in Israel. The Iranian authorities say over 600 people were killed in Iran. The status of Iran's nuclear programme is uncertain after the US strikes. Despite the ceasefire with Israel, Iranian airspace remains largely closed. The closure will be extended until 2 pm (1030 GMT) on Friday, IRNA reported, citing a ministry spokesman. Some exceptions were allowed for the eastern part of the country, but the country's main international hub in the capital remains closed. Authorities warn of continued Israeli activity Iran's intelligence services remain on high alert, despite the ceasefire with Israel, according to official reports. "The cessation of hostile military operations does not mean the end of (Israel's) malicious and hostile actions," the state news agency Tasnim reported. The actions include gathering intelligence about the country, spreading misinformation and weakening national unity, the report said. Suspicious cases must therefore be reported under all circumstances, it added. - dpa
