The United States-Israel war against Iran has apparently undermined both regional and global strategic stability. Joint precision strikes carried out by the US and Israel have pushed the Middle East major conformation with nuclear related risks. Even though there is a ceasefire, there is still no concrete peace, as many unresolved issues remain on the table. This makes the ongoing NPT Review Conference more significant because it is taking place in the background of a conflict involving attacks around nuclear infrastructure and growing distrust in non-proliferation diplomacy.
From the perspective of Washington and Tel Aviv, the strategic rationale for such operations is often framed around preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons capability. President Donald Trump in his statement at the White House said that “fight was needed to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, which Tehran denies seeking, and to thwart its long-range ballistic missile program”. He further added “an Iranian regime armed with long-range missiles and nuclear weapons would be an intolerable threat to the Middle East, but also to the American people”. Israeli leadership has consistently argued that pre-emptive military action is necessary to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program, which it perceives as an existential threat. Although, from the perspective of some states, military action can be justified as a non-proliferation effort, it creates a serious challenge for the non-proliferation regime because it undermines confidence in diplomacy and dialogue.
Consequently, Iran’s nuclear facilities have remained central targets within Israel’s national security calculus. Contextually, targeting Iranian nuclear facilities has not only undermine the credibility of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), but could also raises questions about the regulative practices for peaceful uses of nuclear technology. One of the most concerning aspects of this conflict is that any attack on the nuclear installations might have given rise to radiological danger.
Amid the contemporary Middle Eastern crisis, reports of the military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities including Bushehr and Natanz have heightened international concerns regarding the vulnerability of its nuclear infrastructure during armed conflict. Fortunately, no damage to the plant and injuries have been reported so far from the military strikes on Bushehr nuclear facility. In this regard the United Nations (UN) watchdog, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reports minor damage to the Natanz nuclear facility. The IAEA reports “no radiological consequence expected and no additional impact detected at FEP itself,”. The IAEA’s Incident and Emergency Centre (IEC) gathered information and was assessing the situation closely. The IAEA Director General (DG) Rafael Mariano Grossi stated “so far, no elevation of radiation levels above the usual background levels has been detected in countries bordering Iran”. However, such incidents underscore the inherent risks associated with military engagements near sensitive nuclear sites. Even limited structural damage can disrupt critical safety systems, including power supply networks and cooling mechanisms, thereby raising the probability of technical failures or accidental radiation releases. Similarly, so far, there are no reports of radioactive release or radiation from Dimona nuclear facility after being attacked by Iran in retaliation. IAEA has stated that “it is not aware of any damage to the nuclear research facility located about 13km (eight miles) outside Dimona.” Moreover, over the past two decades, military activities near nuclear power plants (NPPs) have emerged as an alarming trend in contemporary warfare even outside of the Middle East. The conflict in Ukraine, particularly military operations around major nuclear installations including Zaporizhzhya nuclear site, demonstrated how sustained hostilities can endanger reactor safety and complicate international monitoring efforts
Despite no radiological release or any big incident, these development need attention at the NPT review conference because they strengthen ongoing debate about the protection nuclear facilities during the armed conflict. In the Middle East, it is even more vital because it can have huge impact on the human security across and pollute the ocean water and countries in the region relies on the water coming from them. This is why it becomes more significant because they can create a chain of events which can endanger not only immediate region but the whole world.
The concerns are also relevant in states that rely on the peaceful uses of nuclear technology and energy needs. The peaceful application of nuclear technology plays a vital role in fulfilling rising energy demands, supports economic growth, and reduces the countries dependence on fossil fuels. However, the risk of radiation has to be kept in mind. Further the military confrontation in the geo-political volatile regions undermines the operational safety of such facilities. Disruptions to external power supplies, limited access for regulatory inspections, and constraints on emergency preparedness mechanisms can collectively weaken nuclear safety regimes. This is directly relevant to the NPT’s peaceful-use pillar, since states may become more hesitant to expand civilian nuclear energy if international institutions cannot ensure that nuclear infrastructure remains protected during war or crisis.
The recurring military strikes near nuclear installations also illustrates the severe consequences of sustained infrastructure damage. Repeated attacks on external power lines can force nuclear plants to depend on backup diesel generators to maintain essential cooling systems for reactor cores and spent fuel storage. Extended reliance on such emergency measures increases the likelihood of overheating incidents, technical malfunctions, or even catastrophic accidents. As it is well known, that the release of radioactive materials could lead to long-term environmental degradation, mass displacement, and severe public health crises across regions.
Considering the widespread and long-terms effects of the conflict, it is crucial for countries to keep the strategic and sensitive sites protective from military conflicts. Of course, the continued and repeated attacks on the nuclear facilities, challenges the already agreed norms set by the governing authorities. Thus, these actions complicate the role of the relevant international regulatory bodies whose monitoring capabilities may be constrained by security conditions.
In this context, it is imperative, for the international community and regulatory bodies to strengthen legal and institutional frameworks to ensure the safeguarding of the nuclear infrastructures in conflicting regions. To mitigate the risks of escalation related to nuclear installations, it is essential to enhance confidence-building measures (CBMs), strengthen diplomatic ties, and promote transparency in nuclear governance. More importantly, to ensure uninterrupted safety monitoring and rapid emergency response during periods of heightened tension, can only be achieved by strengthening crisis management mechanisms.
The ongoing NPT review conference should move beyond the general discussion. It should encourage states parties to develop clear norms that place nuclear facilities off-limits from attack during conflict. As in the future, the use of nuclear energy is going to increase due to data centers and development of AI. It is also important in context of climate change and achieving goals in the Paris climate agreement.
Geo-political rivalry against nuclear vulnerability is one of the most critical security challenges in the contemporary era. Military strikes near nuclear installation does not only harm regional stability but also cause humanitarian and environment repercussions beyond borders. To avoid catastrophic consequences, the NPT Review Conference should encourage states parties to adopt a cooperative and sustained commitment among countries and relevant international bodies. Moreover, institutions such as the IAEA should ensure that nuclear facilities are not attacked during conflict by either nuclear-weapon states or non-nuclear-weapon states. A renewed commitment to international norms is also crucial to protect humanity from calamitous nuclear disasters during war-like situations.
This article was published in another form at https://strategicforecast.cissajk.org.pk/?p=23403
Dr Rahat Iqbal is Associate Director Research at the Center for International Strategic Studies (CISS), Islamabad.
