In the hours after Iran launched a missile attack on the United States (US)-run Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, President Trump brokered a ceasefire to end the conflict between Iran and Israel. Earlier, the US had carried out air strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities, including Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, marking America’s entry into the war Israel had begun against Iran just over a week earlier. The US bombers dropped 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs on Iranian underground nuclear sites, joining Israel’s war. Israel had launched strikes against Iran’s military and scientific leadership just before another round of nuclear talks between Iran and the US. Since 13 June, these strikes have killed 639 people in Iran. In response to the attack by Israel, Iranian missiles, in a new round of coordinated missiles and drone attacks, targeted military sites in northern Israel, including Tel Aviv and Haifa. Tehran has repeatedly stated that the country’s nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. However, Israel, which possesses nuclear weapons and is not a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), launched unprovoked attacks on Iran’s declared nuclear facilities, jeopardising global peace. These strikes on Iran’s declared nuclear installations reveal the inefficacy of the NPT in safeguarding the interests and safety of the non-nuclear member states.
Some of the underlying dynamics of this crisis have serious consequences on how the war will unfold in the coming days. First, Iran arguably has the largest missile program in the Middle East, with thousands of ballistic missiles that are capable of operating at varying ranges and speeds. Tehran could engage Tel Aviv in a direct war for weeks, which would be unprecedented for Israelis. Its advanced new guided ballistic missile, the Haj Qassem, which Tehran used on 15 June, was designed to evade Israel’s Iron Dome defence system, and it can even get past the US military’s Terminal High Altitude Defense. This guided ballistic missile is also equipped with an advanced navigation system that enables it to hit targets precisely and counter electronic warfare. This is a major concern for both Israel and the US.
Secondly, in the ongoing information warfare, the accurate facts about the damage inflicted upon Israel and Iran would be hard to ascertain. However, continuous aggression against Iran, a NPT non-nuclear weapon state (NNWS) by a defector nuclear-armed Israel undermines the credibility of the NPT. Missile strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities contradict the Final documents of the 2000 and 2010 NPT Review Conferences (RevCon).
Thirdly, as per the 2010 RevCon, nuclear safety is jeopardised by the attack or threats of attack on nuclear facilities that are devoted to peaceful purposes. Such attacks could have grave political, economic and environmental effects, highlighting concerns related to the application of international law on the use of force. Such a scenario warrants a proportionate response in line with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations. Likewise, the US has repeatedly reiterated that Tehran has not had any organised effort to develop its nuclear weapons since 2003.
Nevertheless, Israel targeted Iran’s nuclear facilities in Isfahan, Natanz and Fordov. All these facilities are under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and the Agency verifies State Parties’ Compliance with the NPT. Military strikes on these nuclear facilities severely undermine the importance of IAEA safeguards.
Historically, Iran showed compliance with the IAEA safeguards, concluding a comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA in 1974, and it also voluntarily worked on the Additional Protocol from 2003 to 2006. Iran signed the Additional Protocol until 2021 after signing the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015. Iran discontinued adhering to the Additional Protocol after the unilateral withdrawal by the US from the JCPOA. However, non-compliance with the IAEA over undeclared locations does not justify an attack on declared nuclear installations. Tel Aviv, itself not party to the NPT, launched missile strikes against declared nuclear facilities of Iran, an NPT signatory state. Such unprovoked aggression against safeguarded units of an NPT state by a non-NPT state would undermine the spirit of the NPT. As per Reuters, Iranian parliament is also planning to prepare a bill to exit from the NPT in light of recent developments. Israel’s unprovoked aggression could further push Iran to develop nuclear weapons to deter Israel.
The head of the IAEA, Rafael Mariano Grossi, maintained the possibility of both radiological and chemical contamination inside Iran’s main enrichment nuclear facility in Natanz, following missile strikes by Israel on Iran’s nuclear facilities. However, the radiation levels remain normal outside the complex. Director-General of the IAEA, Rafael Mariano Grossi, cautioned the international community about the harmful effects of uranium.
Such radiological conditions endanger lives and significantly increase the risk of harmful radiation exposure, posing severe consequences for humanity. Therefore, the international community must strive for a diplomatic solution that guarantees enduring peace in the Middle East. After recent strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities by the US, the Trump administration would be perceived as complicit in Israel’s attacks on Iran’s declared nuclear installations, raising alarms on the role of the US as a mediator in resolving the crisis in the Middle East. While President Trump has publicly claimed that U.S. strikes “obliterated†Iran’s nuclear facilities and asserted that the program has been destroyed, recent reports suggest he rejected intelligence assessments indicating only a limited setback. His statements appear to contradict U.S. intelligence findings, which do not confirm the complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear capabilities Given the US support for Israel’s strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed the suspension of the sixth round of nuclear talks, which were scheduled on 15 June in Oman. The onus lies on the US to resume nuclear talks. Lastly, if Iran exits NPT, given the US assistance for Israel’s attack on its nuclear installations, then Iran would not be bound by requirements under NPT, including oversight by the IAEA. Therefore, to ensure nuclear transparency, both Israel and the US must pursue a diplomatic solution instead of military escalation.
This article was published in another form at https://cscr.pk/explore/themes/defense-security/israels-strikes-on-iran-and-the-legitimacy-of-the-npt/
Ms Nawal Nawaz is Research Assistant at the Center for International Strategic Studies (CISS), Islamabad.
