US and Israel dealt ‘colossal damage' to UN nuclear watchdog
The US and Israel have undermined the credibility of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) by using the agency's information to plan attacks on Iranian nuclear sites, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said.
Israel launched strikes on Iran's nuclear and military infrastructure on June 13, a day after the IAEA's Board of Governors passed a resolution declaring Iran to be in breach of its Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) obligations – an accusation Tehran denies. Last week, the US carried out extensive airstrikes targeting three Iranian nuclear facilities.
'The fact that Iranian nuclear facilities under the control of the IAEA have become targets for American and Israeli missiles is an open challenge to the NPT,' Zakharova said in a press briefing on Wednesday. The UN nuclear watchdog's own resolutions declare attacks on nuclear sites illegal under international law.
The attacks posed 'real obstacles' to implementing agreements between the IAEA and Tehran, she added.
The credibility of the agency's global verification system, which was used as a source of information for planning the bombing, is in question.
Therefore, the US and Israel are 'responsible for colossal damage to the IAEA's activities, no matter how hard they try to blame Tehran,' Zakharova said.
According to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, European leaders pressured IAEA chief Rafael Grossi into publishing a negative report on Iran, which was later used to justify an IAEA Board of Governors resolution accusing the Islamic Republic of breaking the NPT. The West 'exerts very serious influence on international organizations,' and most of these bodies are no longer unbiased, he said on Tuesday.
Grossi admitted just last week that the agency had found no evidence that Iran had a 'systematic plan' to build a nuclear weapon but expressed concern about Tehran enriching uranium to 60% purity. The fissile material needs to be enriched to 90% to be considered weapons grade.
The Iranian Parliament has voted to suspend cooperation with the IAEA until the Islamic Republic is given security guarantees for its nuclear facilities. The bill currently awaits ratification by the Supreme National Security Council to be made law.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that Tehran will also need to reconsider its NPT cooperation. 'Twenty years of transparency and trust-building regarding Iran's peaceful nuclear program' have not yielded results, and this issue will be addressed, he told New Arab on Tuesday.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
Iran bars UN atomic energy chief from its nuclear sites
Iran has barred the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from visiting its nuclear facilities. Tehran has accused the agency of distorting facts in a recent report, thereby providing justification for the recent Israeli and US strikes against the Islamic Republic. The vice speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Hamid Reza Haji Babaei, announced on Saturday that Tehran would no longer allow IAEA personnel, including chief Rafael Grossi personally, to inspect its nuclear sites, as quoted by the local media outlet Mehr. The agency's surveillance cameras will cease operating at the facilities, he added. Earlier this week, Iran's constitutional watchdog, the Guardian Council, approved a legislation to suspend cooperation with the IAEA until Iran is given security guarantees for its nuclear facilities. The bill is currently awaiting ratification. Israel, which has for years has claimed that Tehran is secretly developing a nuclear weapon program, launched massive airstrikes against Iran on June 13, targeting several nuclear sites and a number of senior military commanders and scientists believed to be involved in the nuclear program. Last Sunday, the US joined the Israeli military campaign, striking the Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow nuclear facilities. Shortly thereafter, a ceasefire was reached between Israel and Iran. Iran has maintained that its nuclear program is strictly peaceful in nature. In a post on X last week, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei accused the IAEA of issuing a 'biased report' that 'obscured this truth' and was 'instrumentalized… to craft a resolution' that was later used by Israel to justify 'an unlawful attack' on Iran's nuclear facilities. He also suggested that the agency had handed over 'sensitive facility data' to Israel. The document released earlier this month stated that 'Iran is the only non-nuclear-weapon state in the world that is producing and accumulating uranium enriched to 60%.' The UN nuclear watchdog's board then declared Iran in breach of its non-proliferation duties for the first time in 20 years, with 19 out of 35 IAEA member states backing the motion, including the US, UK, France, and Germany. Appearing on CNN last Thursday, Grossi insisted that the watchdog's report 'could hardly be a basis for military action.' He added that the agency did not 'have any indication that there is a systematic program in Iran to manufacture, to produce a nuclear weapon.' On Tuesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that the 'Europeans… were actively preparing Grossi so that he would put the most ambiguously negative formulations into his report.' Weeks before the Israeli and US airstrikes against Iran, Reuters cited anonymous diplomats as making allegations to the same effect.
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
US terminating trade talks with Canada
US President Donald Trump has announced the termination of all trade talks with Canada in light of Ottawa's tax on digital services, which he called a 'adirect and blatant attack on our country.' Relations between the neighbors began to sour when Trump imposed 25% tariffs on Canadian goods in February soon after taking office. Ottawa responded with reciprocal tariffs. Trump later temporarily suspended the tariffs, expressing a willingness to negotiate individually favorable terms for US businesses with the countries that he had targeted for tariffs. Trump has long accused Canada of taking unfair advantage of the US and has on several occasions suggested that it should become the 51st US state, arguing that Washington effectively subsidizes Canada's economy. In a post on Truth Social on Friday, Trump stated that 'Canada, a very difficult Country to TRADE with… has just announced that they are putting a Digital Services Tax on our American Technology Companies, which is a direct and blatant attack on our Country.' 'Based on this egregious Tax, we are hereby terminating ALL discussions on Trade with Canada, effective immediately,' the US president proclaimed. He added that his government would notify Ottawa of the 'Tariff that they will be paying to do business with the United States of America within the next seven day period.' Later on Friday, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney told reporters that his country would 'continue to conduct these complex negotiations in the best interests of Canadians.' However, he noted that he had yet to speak with Trump about the issue. Canada's digital services tax, enacted in June 2024, requires companies providing digital services in the country and earning more than CAD 20 million ($14.5 million) in revenue from Canadian sources to pay a 3% tax on their profits. The first payments are due on Monday. According to Canadian media, US tech giants such as Amazon, Apple, Airbnb, Google, Meta, and Uber are expected to pay approximately $2 billion by the end of July. The tax is retroactive to January 1, 2022. In March, Carney described Trump's tariffs as 'unjustified' and stated that 'Canada will win' the trade war with the US. He vowed that Canada 'will never, ever, in any way, shape, or form, be part of the United States.'
Russia Today
6 hours ago
- Russia Today
Russia's surprising role in the Israel-Iran conflict that you might not know about
During a recent visit to Turkmenistan, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov held talks with his counterparts and addressed students at the Institute of International Relations in Ashgabat. Among the central themes of his remarks was the escalating conflict between Iran and Israel – a confrontation that not only affects global geopolitics but also directly impacts the security dynamics of Central Asia. For Turkmenistan – which shares over 1,100km of border with Iran and has its capital just miles from that border – the growing tension poses serious risks. Beyond humanitarian concerns, the prospect of a wider war could awaken dormant radical networks and destabilize fragile domestic balances. These risks extend beyond Turkmenistan to other southern former Soviet republics that maintain close political and military ties with Russia. Against this backdrop, Lavrov's call for de-escalation and regional stability carried added weight. For Moscow, Iran is not just a partner – it's a pillar in the buffer zone securing Russia's southern flank. Instability in Tehran could ripple across Central Asia, threatening Russia's near-abroad. In January of this year, Russia and Iran signed a comprehensive strategic partnership agreement, institutionalizing bilateral ties and hinting at a future formal alliance. Tellingly, just days after Israeli airstrikes targeted Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi flew to Moscow, met with President Vladimir Putin, and held talks with Lavrov. He later described the visit as marked by 'complete mutual understanding' and emphasized Russia's support in an interview with the news outlet Al-Araby Al-Jadeed. Russia, along with China and Pakistan, has since pushed a new UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire and a pathway to political settlement. As Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia noted, the resolution aims to stop further escalation. Yet Moscow has been careful in its public rhetoric. At the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Putin avoided inflammatory language toward Israel, instead stressing the need for a diplomatic solution acceptable to all sides. This cautious tone reflects Russia's balancing act: deepening ties with Tehran while maintaining working – and in some cases warm – relations with Israel, including in military and humanitarian channels. That dual posture allows Russia to position itself as a potential mediator, should either party seek a negotiated outcome. On June 13, as Israeli airstrikes intensified, Russia quickly condemned the attacks and voiced strong concern about violations of Iranian sovereignty. Putin went further, calling US behavior in the region 'unprovoked aggression.' Moscow's message was clear: it opposed outside military interventions – full stop. Days before Araghchi's trip, Putin publicly revealed that Russia had offered Iran expanded cooperation on air defense systems, an offer Tehran had not pursued. Far from a rebuke, it read as a nudge: if the strategic partnership is real, Iran needs to meet Russia halfway. Moscow remains open to closer defense collaboration, including integrating Iran's air defense into a broader regional security framework. In retrospect, had Tehran taken up the offer earlier, it might have been better prepared to repel the strikes. For Russia, security is measured not in rhetoric, but in results – and it expects its partners to act accordingly. Crucially, the 2025 strategic agreement between Moscow and Tehran does not entail mutual defense obligations. It is not the Russian equivalent of NATO's Article 5, nor does it mandate automatic military assistance. As Putin clarified, the pact reflects political trust and coordination – not a blank check for joint warfare. In fact, the treaty explicitly forbids either side from supporting a third party that launches aggression against the other. Russia has held to that standard – refusing to engage with perceived aggressors, while voicing diplomatic solidarity with Iran and condemning destabilizing actions by the US and Israel. In short, the architecture of the partnership is built on sovereign respect and strategic equilibrium – not entangling commitments. It centers on military-technical cooperation, coordinated diplomacy via BRICS and the SCO, and shared interest in regional stability. But it stops short of dragging Russia into wars that don't pose a direct threat to its national security. One development drew particular attention: just after Araghchi's Kremlin visit, US President Donald Trump abruptly called for a ceasefire and adopted a noticeably softer tone on Iran. With the exception of a few pointed posts on Truth Social, his messaging turned markedly more measured. Prior to his trip to Moscow, Araghchi emphasized in Istanbul that consultations with Russia were 'strategic and not ceremonial.' He made clear that Tehran viewed the partnership as a platform for sensitive security coordination – not just protocol. Whether by coincidence or not, the shift in US rhetoric suggests Moscow's influence may have quietly shaped the trajectory of events. Russia, after all, is one of the few actors with open channels to both Tehran and Tel Aviv. It's entirely plausible that the Kremlin served as a behind-the-scenes intermediary, securing at least a temporary pause in hostilities. Russia remains a calibrated but consequential player in the Middle East. Accusations that Moscow has failed to 'stand by' Iran are speculative and largely unfounded – both politically and legally. Russia offers solidarity, coordination, and leverage – not unconditional support for escalation. And in a region where words matter as much as missiles, a subtle shift in language from Washington – timed to quiet talks in the Kremlin – may say more than any press release. Diplomacy, after all, often moves where cameras don't.
