International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi warned of the risk of nuclear contamination from Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities. Attacks on nuclear sites in Iran have caused a sharp degradation in nuclear safety and security in the country. Though they have not so far led to a radiological release affecting the public, there is a danger this could occur, said Grossi.
In his briefing at an emergency meeting of the Security Council, Grossi said that although the level of radioactivity outside the Natanz site after an Israeli attack has remained unchanged and at normal levels, there is both radiological and chemical contamination within the facility, Xinhua news agency reported.
“The radiation, primarily consisting of alpha particles, poses a significant danger if inhaled or ingested. This risk can be effectively managed with appropriate protective measures, such as using respiratory devices. The main concern inside the facility is chemical toxicity,” he said.
Fordow is Iran’s main enrichment location for enriching uranium to 60 per cent. The IAEA is not aware of any damage at Fordow at this time, he said.
At the Esfahan nuclear site, four buildings were damaged in the June 13 attack. No increase in off-site radiation levels was reported. As in Natanz, the main concern is chemical toxicity, he noted.
The attacks on other nuclear facilities have had no radiological impact, said Grossi.
The chief of the UN nuclear watchdog warned of serious consequences of an attack on the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, which is an operating nuclear power plant and which hosts thousands of kilograms of nuclear material.
“I want to make it absolutely and completely clear: In case of an attack on the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, a direct hit could result in a very high release of radioactivity to the environment,” he said.
Similarly, a hit that disabled the only two lines supplying electrical power to the plant could cause its reactor’s core to melt, which could result in a high release of radioactivity to the environment. In their worst case, both scenarios would necessitate protective actions, such as evacuations and sheltering of the population or the need to take stable iodine, with the reach extending to distances from a few to several hundred kilometers.
Radiation monitoring would need to cover distances of several hundred kilometres and food restrictions may need to be implemented, he warned.
Grossi added that any action against the Tehran Nuclear Research Reactor could also have severe consequences, potentially for large areas of the city and its inhabitants.
Armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place, he said, calling for maximum restraint.
Military escalation threatens lives and delays indispensable work toward a diplomatic solution for the long-term assurance that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon, he said.
“A diplomatic solution is within reach if the necessary political will is there. Elements for an agreement have been discussed. The IAEA can guarantee, through a watertight inspections system, that nuclear weapons will not be developed in Iran. They can form the basis of a long-standing agreement that brings peace and avoids a nuclear crisis in the Middle East,” said Grossi. “This opportunity should not be missed.”
The alternative, he said, would be a protracted conflict and a looming threat of nuclear proliferation that, while emanating from the Middle East, would effectively erode the Non-Proliferation Treaty and the non-proliferation regime as a whole.
