Iran’s nuclear chief Mohammad Eslami told the International Atomic Energy Agency’s annual general conference in Vienna on Monday that Tehran’s atomic program will not be destroyed by military operations, accusing Israel and the United States of illegal strikes on its facilities.
“Enemies of Iran should know that our nuclear industry has deep roots and cannot be eliminated through military action,” Eslami said in his address to the 69th General Conference.
He added that “Iran will not yield to political or military pressure and will not give up its inherent rights.”
The head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran said Tehran’s cooperation with the IAEA “has been broad and consistent,” but accused the agency of failing to condemn what he called aggressive acts against Iranian nuclear sites.
“Despite our formal request, the agency did not condemn the attacks by the United States and Israel on the nuclear centers of the Islamic Republic,” he said. “This silence and inaction will remain as a stain on the Agency’s history.”
Eslami also criticized European efforts to trigger the “snapback” mechanism to restore UN sanctions on Iran, calling them illegal.
He said the 2015 nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), had shown diplomacy could succeed, but argued that Western states had undermined it.
“Today, on the anniversary of the JCPOA, we see unlawful attempts to activate the snapback mechanism,” he said. “These efforts are a mockery of Resolution 2231.”
Eslami also said Israel’s attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities had targeted not only infrastructure but also diplomacy itself. “The Zionist regime’s goal is not merely to destroy our nuclear centers but to derail the path of diplomacy and peace,” he said.
Eslami also Iran would table a resolution at the conference to ban attacks on nuclear facilities and would hold meetings with states cooperating with Tehran.
The comments come as Iran’s Supreme National Security Council has laid out conditions for future IAEA inspections under a new arrangement signed in Cairo last week by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi.
The council said any inspection of damaged facilities would require its approval, and warned that implementation would stop if hostile actions, including reinstated UN resolutions, were taken against Iran.
Britain, France and Germany triggered the snapback process on August 28, demanding Iran return to talks and account for missing uranium stockpiles. Unless the Security Council blocks the move, sanctions will automatically resume by late September.
The IAEA reported earlier this month that Iran’s 60% enriched uranium stockpile rose to 440.9 kilograms before the June strikes on its facilities. Grossi said the Cairo deal aims to re-establish monitoring once technical procedures are agreed.
“Caught between drought and choking dust storms, Iran’s Sistan-Baluchestan province faces an escalating environmental crisis as the Hamoun wetlands dry up and 120-day winds turn into walls of sand,” Tasnim news agency reported on Monday.
Experts warn more than 85% of Hamoun has vanished, driving mass farmland loss, biodiversity collapse, and waves of forced migration.
Studies say 65% of croplands around the wetland are already barren, while dust storms now last over 200 days a year, cutting visibility to a few hundred meters and worsening respiratory illness.
Officials blame water shortages from Afghanistan’s dams on the Helmand River, which deprive Hamoun of its lifeline. Local researchers say completion of the Bakhshabad dam could “deal the final blow” to the wetland.
With little hope of receiving the agreed water rights from Kabul, Iranian specialists are pushing homegrown fixes.
Despite pilot projects and pledges, locals complain of empty promises. “They say they will revive Hamoun, but nothing happens -- every day it dries more,” a resident told Tasnim.
Environmentalists warn time is running out: without immediate action, the region risks irreversible collapse, with fallout for Iran and its neighbors.
Members of parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee questioned whether the agreement with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) chief Rafael Grossi, signed last week in Cairo, fully complies with a law passed by parliament that restricts nuclear cooperation.
“Some lawmakers asked whether the government had the authority to sign the agreement and whether parliament’s legislation was observed,” one participant in the meeting, who declined to be named, told the state-run Farhikhtegan daily.
“Mr. Araghchi responded that the negotiations and the agreement had been approved within the framework of the Supreme National Security Council.”
Scope of cooperation
According to accounts published by Iranian media, Araghchi explained that the agreement distinguishes between nuclear facilities that have been bombed and those that remain intact.
Sites such as the Bushehr power plant and Tehran’s research reactor would be subject to requests for inspection on a case-by-case basis, reviewed by the Supreme National Security Council (SNSC).
“For facilities like Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan that were targeted, Iran must first conduct safety and environmental checks,” the participant said. “Reports will only be sent to the IAEA once approved by the SNSC. Any subsequent verification steps will also need council authorization.”
Araghchi told lawmakers that the agreement cites UN resolutions and affirms that attacks on nuclear facilities are illegal under the IAEA statute and international law.
He said the text also explicitly refers twice to Iran’s parliamentary law governing nuclear cooperation, underscoring that inspections cannot proceed without national approval.
Dispute over confidentiality
Some MPs urged the government to publish the text. Araghchi replied that releasing the agreement would contravene diplomatic norms.
“The minister said he had brought the text to the session for review by the committee’s leadership and that it had been circulated to parliament earlier in the day,” Farhikhtegan reported.
While some lawmakers expressed unease, others said the session clarified ambiguities.
Behnam Saeedi, a committee member, told reporters: “Representatives raised concerns that the IAEA has been influenced by Israel and the United States in its reporting. The minister explained the text in detail, and while not all were fully satisfied, many concerns were addressed. The important point is that Iran’s red lines and parliamentary law were observed.”
The Cairo deal was reached after June airstrikes by Israel and the United States damaged several Iranian nuclear facilities, forcing inspectors to withdraw. Grossi has said the agreement covers all declared sites, including those attacked, but that practical arrangements will require further negotiations.
Hardline MP Hamid Rasaee separately criticized the deal on Sunday, saying it lacked explicit safeguards against the UN “snapback” mechanism for restoring sanctions. He argued that Araghchi’s public statements had overstated the protections.
Shortly after, the SNSC confirmed that its nuclear committee had approved the agreement and that Tehran would provide reports to the IAEA only after council review.
