Iran’s existing nuclear safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) does not account for wartime conditions and must be revised to protect national security, Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said on Tuesday.
Kamalvandi said the current safeguards agreement under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) was written for “normal circumstances” and provides no clear mechanism for facilities that have come under attack. “The safeguards agreement was not designed for wartime situations and therefore needs to be updated,” he told IRNA.
He added that Iran remains committed to the NPT and its verification framework but said the agency’s political approach has complicated cooperation. “When a country is attacked, it cannot be expected to immediately allow inspectors into damaged sites, because that could mean handing sensitive information to its enemies,” Kamalvandi said.
The spokesman said Tehran would continue cooperating with the IAEA over undamaged facilities, but for those hit during recent strikes, “a new legal understanding is needed.” He said the safeguards regime allows for such revisions under its articles 20–22, which permit amendments in exceptional circumstances.
IAEA 'accepted Iran’s point' in Cairo talks
Kamalvandi also revealed that during recent discussions in Cairo, IAEA officials had effectively acknowledged Iran’s legal argument, accepting that the existing safeguards framework does not fully address post-conflict conditions. “Their agreement in Cairo shows that they understood our point — the current text cannot respond to the realities after the 12-day war,” he said.
He stressed that any future cooperation with the agency must ensure that Iran’s security and classified information are protected, saying Tehran is prepared to propose new verification methods “compatible with the realities of a conflict environment.”
“Our main goal is to find a path within the law,” Kamalvandi said. “We are not closing the door to cooperation, but the rules must reflect the conditions that Iran — or any country under attack — faces.”
Foreign minister warns of radiation risk at bombed nuclear sites
Meanwhile, earlier this week Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran faces “security threats and safety concerns” after strikes on its nuclear facilities during the 12-day war in June, warning of potential radiation leaks from damaged sites.
In an interview with Japan’s Kyodo News published on Sunday, Araghchi said the attacks had created “serious dangers,” including possible contamination and unexploded ordnance.
Araghchi added that while Tehran remains open to new nuclear talks if Washington shows “a logic of confidence-building,” IAEA inspections cannot resume at damaged facilities until “clear protocols” are established to protect both safety and sovereignty.
“During just one week, emergency departments nationwide recorded over 170,000 pollution-related visits,” Raisi said on Tuesday, noting that cases had risen by 20 to 25 percent compared with normal levels. “Most of these patients came from the 11 provinces with the highest pollution, showing the scale of the crisis,” he added.
Raisi said the Health Ministry estimates the annual health cost of pollution at about $17 billion, and that more than 59,000 people died last year from diseases linked to poor air quality.
Citing World Health Organization data, Raisi said most Iranian cities suffer from dangerously high levels of pollutants. “Tehran had only 14 clean-air days last year, Isfahan 16, Mashhad 28, and Ahvaz just two,” he said. “This means a large part of the population is exposed to hazardous air nearly all year.”
He said particles smaller than 2.5 microns “enter the bloodstream quickly and are proven causes of cancer, cardiovascular disease, and severe respiratory disorders.”
Tehran suffers record air pollution, Shargh reports
The reformist daily Shargh said the current Iranian year, 1404, has been Tehran’s worst for air pollution in at least two decades, with more than half of all days so far classified as polluted. “In no previous year have the data been this dark,” wrote analyst Ali Pirhosseinlou in a Tuesday commentary.
He said the number of “acceptable” air-quality days has dropped to about one-third of the year, while at least four days so far have seen daily air quality index readings above 200 — considered “very unhealthy.”
“The situation is worse than at any time in the past two decades,” Shargh wrote. “There is no plan to control the sources of pollution. No effort to renew diesel fleets, improve fuel quality, or reduce traffic. Instead, the municipality has restricted access to air-quality data.”
The paper concluded: “This is not interpretation – it is reality.”