Iran’s Policy of the United Nations Atomic Agency Faces Mixed Review After U.S. and Israel’s “Erased” Nuclear Site
After a lengthy confrontation lasting 12 days, President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu claimed success against Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Trump stated that three nuclear sites had effectively vanished, following Netanyahu’s warning of an “immediate existential threat” posed by Iran in terms of both nuclear capability and ballistic missiles.
Dr. Rabinowitz, an expert in nuclear proliferation from Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a visiting associate professor at Stanford, shared with Fox News Digital that the IAEA cannot independently stop a nation intent on shifting nuclear materials and technology from civilian uses to military ones. “It can issue warnings, and that’s what it’s doing,” she explained, adding that while these warnings sometimes result in resolutions from the UN Security Council, the IAEA’s authority is limited—it’s reliant on the member states involved.
Prior to Israel’s military actions aimed at neutralizing the nuclear threat, international nuclear monitors estimated that Iran had around 408.6 kilograms (close to 901 pounds) of uranium enriched enough to produce nine nuclear bombs. This report highlighted Iran’s insufficient cooperation with the IAEA and, for the first time in two decades, recommended that the governing body declare that the Islamic Republic had violated its non-proliferation commitments.
“This sort of failure shouldn’t come as a surprise; it reflects broader failures within the United Nations,” remarked Dr. Joel Guzansky, a senior fellow at the National Security Institute at Tel Aviv University. He recently noted that Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Aragut had spoken at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, even while numerous ballistic missiles rained down on Israeli territories.
“Iran was welcomed at the UN, whereas Israel was sidelined,” Guzansky noted. “This indicates a long-standing failing within the UN system, which requires significant reforms.” He also described the IAEA as relatively competent compared to other UN entities. “It’s not a clear-cut scenario—it has had successes, but the outcomes depend largely on expectations,” he acknowledged, adding that he doesn’t believe anyone expects the IAEA to stop Iran entirely.
He argued that two decades of investigations have actually enabled both Israel and the U.S. to better understand Iran’s nuclear initiatives. Iran continuously asserts that its nuclear efforts are purely peaceful and denies any intention of crafting or obtaining nuclear weapons. Alan Mendoza, executive director of the Henry Jackson Society, emphasized that the primary issue lies not with the IAEA. “Iran has been deceptive for years; it hasn’t been straightforward at all,” he remarked.
He further explained that Iran is generating confusion by secretly advancing programs that evade IAEA scrutiny. “In many respects, the shortcomings aren’t the IAEA’s fault; the agency’s role is just to monitor,” he concluded.
