Department of Research, Studies and International News 10-07-2025

In a firm stance against perceived international double standards, Iran has declared that future cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) hinges on the agency’s ability to act impartially. This declaration follows a series of deadly airstrikes by the United States and Israel on Iranian territory, including nuclear facilities, in June, strikes that the IAEA notably refused to condemn.

President Masoud Pezeshkian, addressing European Council President Antonio Costa by phone, stressed that Iran’s collaboration with the UN nuclear watchdog cannot continue under the current conditions. “The continuation of Iran’s cooperation with the agency depends on the latter correcting its double standards regarding the nuclear file,” Pezeshkian stated, according to Iranian state media.

The Iranian president also issued a stern warning, stating that “any repeated aggression against Iran will be met with a more decisive and regrettable response.”

Eroding trust after unprovoked strikes

Tensions escalated dramatically in mid-June after Israeli forces launched a wave of unprovoked air attacks targeting not only Iranian military and nuclear sites, but also civilian infrastructure. These strikes were soon followed by U.S. air raids deploying bunker-busting bombs, further intensifying the conflict. Iran responded decisively, firing a barrage of missiles and drones at Israeli positions in a 12-day confrontation that threatened regional stability.

In a retaliatory move, Iran also targeted a U.S. military base in Qatar, an act widely viewed as a final warning before a fragile ceasefire was declared by then U.S. President Donald Trump. These events have left a deep scar on Iran’s already tense relationship with the IAEA.

Last week, President Pezeshkian enacted legislation suspending Iran’s voluntary cooperation with the IAEA. The agency has since confirmed the withdrawal of its remaining inspectors, who have now returned to its headquarters in Vienna. Although the IAEA stated that its staff remained in Tehran during the hostilities and expressed a desire to resume monitoring “as soon as possible,” Iranian officials are no longer convinced of the agency’s neutrality.

A watchdog under scrutiny

At the heart of Iran’s frustration is the IAEA’s decision to issue a resolution on June 12, just a day before the coordinated attacks by the U.S. and Israel, accusing Iran of non-compliance with its nuclear obligations. Tehran views this move not only as poorly timed, but also as a potential green light for military action.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi has labeled the restoration of dialogue with Iran as a “top priority,” but acknowledged that his agency has had no access to Iranian facilities since the attacks. This lack of access, coupled with the IAEA’s silence over the military aggression Iran endured, has led Iranian officials to question the agency’s role as a neutral arbiter.

Iran, a longstanding signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), has consistently emphasized that its nuclear programme is peaceful in nature. While Iran categorically denies seeking nuclear weapons, it has made it clear that trust in the IAEA has collapsed due to the agency’s inaction in the face of blatant Western aggression.

Western hypocrisy and BRICS solidarity

The response from Washington has been predictable. U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce condemned Tehran’s decision to suspend cooperation with the IAEA, calling it “unacceptable.” She urged Iran to “reverse course and choose a path of peace and prosperity,” asserting that “Iran cannot and will not have a nuclear weapon.” Yet no credible evidence from either U.S. intelligence or the IAEA supports the claim that Iran is pursuing a nuclear arsenal, making these pronouncements little more than a political ploy.

In contrast, global actors outside the Western orbit have reacted with justified outrage. The BRICS alliance, comprising major non-Western powers including China and Russia, strongly condemned the U.S. and Israeli bombings of Iran, labeling them a “blatant breach of international law.” This unified stance from rising global powers signals growing impatience with Washington’s unilateral militarism and the international institutions seen as complicit in its campaigns.

The path forward

As Tehran recalibrates its position on nuclear oversight, it is making one message clear: it will no longer tolerate international bodies acting as tools of Western dominance. If the IAEA is to regain credibility and resume its mission in Iran, it must adopt a truly impartial approach and distance itself from U.S. and Israeli agendas.

Until that happens, Iran is likely to continue charting its own course, one that aligns more closely with emerging global powers who advocate for a multipolar and equitable world order, free from the grip of U.S. hegemony.