Iran, UN nuclear watchdog reach agreement on resuming inspections

Iran’s government said on Tuesday it does not currently have access to its stockpiles of enriched uranium following June’s 12-day war that devastated the country’s nuclear facilities, as its foreign minister traveled to Egypt for talks with the UN nuclear watchdog.

“In regard to uranium, we do not have access to it. It is in a location where access does not exist,” government spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani told reporters at her weekly press briefing, without giving details of where the material is being held.

Her remarks came as Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi arrived in Cairo for meetings with Egyptian officials and IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi. The talks are expected to focus on a new framework for nuclear inspections after Iran suspended cooperation with the agency in July.

• 

  No sign of Iranian efforts to access enriched uranium stocks at Isfahan - ISIS

Foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei confirmed late on Monday that “negotiations on the new protocol for Iran’s safeguards obligations will be finalized” during the Cairo meeting.

He said three rounds of technical talks had already produced a draft text that is now in its final stage.

Tasnim, citing an informed source on Tuesday, reported: “Today’s meeting between Abbas Araghchi and Rafael Grossi, the IAEA director general, is significant and will be held in Egypt within hours.”

The unnamed source added: “Although nothing has been finalized yet, a potential agreement between Iran and the Agency is possible.”

Voicing skepticism over progress in the Cairo talks, Laurence Norman, a correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, reported on Tuesday that he had learned “there is no agreement in place between Tehran and the agency, and the situation remains unclear.”

Mohajerani also referred to Iran’s complaint that IAEA inspectors had removed confidential documents from the Fordow enrichment site earlier this year.

“In early May, two documents accessed by inspectors were transferred to Vienna. After Iran submitted a written protest, the authorization of those two inspectors was revoked and their cooperation with Iran ended,” she said.

The government spokeswoman added that Iran’s future cooperation with the IAEA will be shaped by a law passed by parliament in June curbing the agency’s access, but stressed that any decision on leaving the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) “will ultimately be made by the system as a whole.”

• 

  Iran’s law on restricting IAEA work cannot bind agency, Grossi says

• 

  Iran urges IAEA chief to condemn attacks on atomic sites ahead of Cairo talks

On Monday, the watchdog's chief dismissed allegations that IAEA data had been misused to enable attacks on facilities, calling the allegation “an absurd narrative.” The agency, he said, had never shared confidential inspection information and was discussing additional measures to reassure Iran that safeguards data remained secure.

Rafael Grossi also told governors that Iran’s suspension of cooperation under a new domestic law cannot override its binding international commitments.

Several Iranian sources told Iran International that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei instructed President Masoud Pezeshkian to seek mediation through the emir of Qatar to ease tensions with the West.

The diplomatic push comes as Britain, France, and Germany triggered the so-called “snapback” mechanism at the United Nations aimed at restoring all sanctions on Iran, citing Tehran’s refusal to meet Western demands over its nuclear and missile programs.

In a paper assessing the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) September quarterly reports, ISIS said the attacks “destroyed or made inoperative all of Iran’s installed centrifuges… at Iran’s three enrichment sites,” and severely damaged Iran’s ability to manufacture centrifuges and uranium hexafluoride feedstock.

The group, led by nuclear expert David Albright, added that Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan held enriched uranium stocks before the strikes, but the IAEA has lost on-site visibility since inspectors withdrew for safety reasons in late June and Iran later suspended cooperation.

The IAEA’s reporting showed Iran’s stock of uranium enriched up to 60% U-235 reached 440.9 kg (uranium mass) on the eve of the June 13 bombardment, with additional inventories of 20%, 5% and up to 2% material also on hand.

The agency said the 60% stockpile -- considered highly enriched uranium -- requires verification every 30 days under standard safeguards practice and that “its verification… is overdue” because inspectors have not had access for more than two and a half months.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi told the Agency’s Board of Governors on Monday that Iran’s new domestic law curbing access “may create obligations domestically,” but “it cannot do so for the IAEA.”

• 

  Iran’s law on restricting IAEA work cannot bind agency, Grossi says

• 

  Iran urges IAEA chief to condemn attacks on atomic sites ahead of Cairo talks

He added that Iran’s NPT safeguards agreement remains in force and that inspection work must fully resume without delay. He said technical talks in Tehran and Vienna had made headway toward a practical arrangement, adding: “It is my sincere hope that within the next few days, it will be possible to come to a successful conclusion.”

ISIS said the IAEA reported Iran was in the process of declaring a new Isfahan Fuel Enrichment Plant (IFEP) at the Nuclear Reactors Fuel Company site before the war.

The think tank assessed the IFEP to be inside Esfahan’s mountain tunnel complex and said US strikes destroyed tunnel entrances and ventilation systems; while Iran has restored limited access to at least one portal, the plant “does not appear to be ready for operations.”

The IAEA planned a design-information visit on June 13 but canceled it as the attacks began.

Before the strikes, the IAEA counted “125 full-sized cascades” at the three declared enrichment plants, totaling more than 20,000 IR-1, IR-2m, IR-4 and IR-6 machines. ISIS estimated the installed total was closer to 22,000, including about 14,700 advanced centrifuges.

Based on satellite imagery cited by the IAEA, Fordow “suffered very significant damage,” Natanz’s underground halls were “extensively damaged,” and the above-ground pilot plant at Natanz was destroyed early in the conflict, ISIS said.

Since June 13, the IAEA said it has received no nuclear-material accountancy reports, no updated design information questionnaires, and has had no access to safeguarded sites other than the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

It reported a “loss of continuity of knowledge” over inventories of enriched uranium, as well as over centrifuge and heavy-water production since Iran halted JCPOA-related monitoring in 2021.

Grossi said only standard measures under Iran’s Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement were under discussion, because Tehran is not applying the Additional Protocol.

He also rejected claims that IAEA data had enabled attacks on Iranian facilities, calling such allegations an “absurd narrative,” and reiterated that the agency does not share confidential inspection information with any state.

European powers have moved to reimpose UN sanctions via the “snapback” mechanism, while Tehran has demanded international condemnation of the strikes on its nuclear sites.

South Korea’s draft is not an initiative of its own, but a legal requirement under Resolution 2231 which endorsed the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and is due to expire on October 18.

According to Resolution 2231, sanctions will automatically return unless the Council votes to keep them lifted. That is why the Council president must first table a resolution to “permanently lift” sanctions as its failure is what triggers the re-imposition.

The procedural step comes as part of the so-called “snapback” mechanism triggered by Britain, France, and Germany late last month, after they accused Tehran of violating its commitments under the deal.

The Security Council must vote by late September on whether to make sanctions relief permanent. For the resolution to pass, it would need at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes from the five permanent members: the United States, Britain, France, Russia, and China.

The adoption of the South Korean resolution is regarded as highly unlikely, as Washington and its European allies remain adamant that Tehran has failed to live up to its obligations, Reuters reported.

As no member tabled a resolution within ten days of the process being launched, it fell to South Korea, as Council president for September, to do so. Seoul’s move on Monday fulfills that requirement, though a date for the vote has not yet been set.

Britain, France, and Germany are still pressing Iran to meet three conditions before the end of the month, which could allow for a temporary delay in sanctions snapback and create space for new negotiations.

• 

  Nuclear crisis looms as Iran faces sanctions snapback, expert warns

Russia and China

Moscow and Beijing have taken a different approach. Late last month, they finalized their own draft resolution calling for a six-month extension of the nuclear deal, urging all parties to return to negotiations.

The resolution of extension of sanctions is expected to be put to vote once Tehran and European powers reach an agreement.

Should Russia and China move first, their text would almost certainly face a veto from the United States, France, or Britain.

On September 4, the emir of Qatar received Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian's verbal message in a meeting in Doha with Iran's top diplomat Abbas Araghchi, the Qatari state news agency confirmed at the time.

Informed sources told Iran International that the message, sent upon Khamenei’s instruction, was a request for Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad to mediate between Tehran and Western powers to avert the reimposition of UN sanctions under the so-called “snapback” mechanism.

Sheikh Tamim has been asked to facilitate contacts with the United States and the E3 (France, Germany, UK) to resume nuclear diplomacy and prevent the return of sanctions, Iran International has learned.

According to the sources, Tehran is showing greater flexibility over discussions concerning the whereabouts and handling of its highly enriched uranium stockpiles, an issue it had refused to broach with interlocutors after recent US airstrikes.

UN nuclear watchdog

Foreign Minister Araghchi will meet with IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi in Cairo on Tuesday, Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei confirmed on Monday.

He said the meeting will aim to wrap up negotiations on the framework of Iran-IAEA cooperation.

The developments come amid intensified scrutiny from UN inspectors. The UN nuclear watchdog has said it has lacked visibility into the status or location of Iran’s highly enriched uranium since attacks on Iranian enrichment facilities began in mid-June.

The IAEA reported in August that Iran held roughly 440.9 kg of 60% enriched uranium, enough, if further refined, for around ten nuclear devices.

Diplomatically, the stakes are rising. Britain, France and Germany triggered the snapback mechanism under UN Security Council Resolution 2231 in late August, setting a timetable under which sanctions relief will lapse unless extended by another resolution.

The E3 are still pressing Iran to meet three conditions before the end of the month, which could allow for a temporary delay in sanctions snapback and create space for new negotiations.

These include allowing UN inspectors access to nuclear sites damaged in Israeli strikes, clarifying the status of its enriched uranium stockpile, and entering direct talks with the United States.

South Korea's resolution to lift sanctions

As the Council president for September, South Korea on Monday finalized a draft resolution that would permanently lift international sanctions on Iran. However, the resolution is unlikely to be adopted, Reuters reported citing diplomats.

South Korea’s draft is not an initiative of its own, but a legal requirement under Resolution 2231 which endorsed the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and is due to expire on October 18.

According to Resolution 2231, sanctions are presumed to return automatically unless the Council votes to keep them lifted. That is why the Council president must first table a resolution to “permanently lift” sanctions as its failure is what triggers the automatic re-imposition.

The procedural step comes as part of the so-called “snapback” mechanism. Under the process, the Security Council must vote by late September on whether to make sanctions relief permanent.

For the resolution to pass, it would need at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes from the five permanent members: the United States, Britain, France, Russia, and China.

The adoption of the resolution is largely regarded as highly unlikely, as Washington and its European allies remain adamant that Tehran has failed to live up to its obligations.

If no member tabled a resolution within ten days of the process being launched, it fell to South Korea, as Council president for September, to act. Seoul’s move on Monday meets that requirement, though no vote date has yet been set.

Supporters of the move argue that only the SNSC can bring coherence to policymaking, uniting rival political factions in a way the Foreign Ministry cannot.

That case was made most clearly in a rare joint commentary by moderate journalist Mohammad Ghoochani and conservative commentator Mohammad Mohajeri, published September 7 in the centrist daily Ham Mihan.

“(The council) is the only body capable of coordinating between the military, diplomats, revolutionaries, reformist and conservative politicians, the President and the Supreme Leader, or indeed between the government and the people,” they wrote.

Notably, they criticized the continued involvement of former SNSC secretary Ali Shamkhani in the nuclear talks and dismissed the idea of handing the file to Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, arguing that Iran could no longer afford the stagnation of recent years.

A day after the joint editorial, Iran’s former ambassador to Germany, Alireza Sheikh Attar, told the conservative daily Farhikhtegan that Larijani had been appointed on September 5 to oversee Iran’s entire nuclear dossier.

If confirmed, Larijani would once more take center stage in tough negotiations in the weeks ahead.

Regroup or rethink?

Although final authority rests with Khamenei, the emphasis on the Council’s coordinating role by Ghoochani and Mohajeri may point to Larijani’s potential to nudge the Leader toward a definitive decision on engagement with Washington.

Khamenei appeared to be abandoning his “neither war nor talks” line in his meeting with President Masoud Pezeshkian and his cabinet. The state of “no war, no peace,” he said, was “the enemies’ plan” and harmed the country.

Hints of movement are already emerging.

Conservative diplomat Alireza Sheikh Attar suggested on Monday that decisions have been made about resuming talks with the United States, possibly coupled with a request to delay activation of the snapback mechanism until negotiations yield results.

Whether these shifts mark a genuine rethink or simply a bureaucratic reshuffle remains uncertain.

Council on the rise?

The proposal by the two prominent editors also reflects frustration at the Council’s long decline.

Created in 1990 amid post-war turmoil, the SNSC was designed as a mechanism for cohesion, tasked with protecting national interests and reconciling state institutions with public needs.

Its first secretary, Hassan Rouhani, held the post for 16 years and was credited with pragmatism, particularly in preventing new wars.

The nuclear dossier was assigned to the Council in the early 2000s, but under president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad control shifted to the foreign ministry—and effectively to Ahmadinejad himself, whose chaotic management eventually forced Khamenei to open backchannels of his own.

Larijani’s return has been welcomed by moderates as a potential revival of rational governance, though his occasional firebrand remarks—such as threats against IAEA chief Rafael Grossi—have raised doubts.

Larijani may bring new energy to the Council. The question is whether he can direct diplomacy in ways others could not or his ascent merely repackages decisions that still flow from the top.