Tag: nuclear power

Russia To Build Eight Nuclear Power Plants In Iran Amid Standoff With US

It’s been no secret that Russia has been getting more heavily involved in Iran’s nuclear program, and interestingly at a moment Moscow has offered to mediate between Washington and Tehran on the question of uranium enrichment and a new nuclear monitoring deal.

On Monday, in a surprise headline given the massive, ambitious scope, Iranian state sources have said Russia will construct eight nuclear power plants in Iran, two of which are already under construction.

“Russia is contracted to build eight nuclear power plants in Iran, including four in the southern city of Bushehr,” Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for the national security and foreign policy committee, announced on Monday.

This marks a monumental leap forward in the Iran-Russia relationship, after the two have deepened military cooperation in relation to the Ukraine war (where Russian forces have heavily relied on Iranian Shahed drones), given that a mere several years ago, Moscow was not even ready to sell Iran nuclear fuel.

But EIGHT? Some critics have denounced this as but PR nonsense and a disservice to the Iranian people, given that by some estimates Russia has already taken over a billion dollars from Iran for rebuilding just one Bushehr nuclear site with hardly any progress to show.

For example, of prior problems and severe timeline setbacks one industry source described:

Iran has one operating nuclear reactor, a 1,000-MW Russian-designed VVER unit at the southern port city of Bushehr, on the coast of the Persian Gulf. Two more VVER-1000 units are under construction at the site. Work on Unit 2 began in 2019, with commercial operation now expected in 2029 after earlier reports said the unit could come online last year. Iranian media reported that installation of safety equipment in Unit 2 began earlier in February, along with excavation works for the water cooling pump houses of both units.

Keep reading

Trump Says New Iran Deal Must Allow US To ‘Blow Up Whatever We Want’

President Donald Trump argued that any revived nuclear accord with Iran should permit the United States to destroy the country’s nuclear infrastructure and send inspectors to Iranian facilities at any time.

The president outlined his vision for a new agreement during a White House presser on Wednesday, calling for a “very strong document” that would effectively give Washington carte blanche over Tehran’s nuclear energy program.

“I want it very strong – where we can go in with inspectors, we can take whatever we want, we can blow up whatever we want, but [with] nobody getting killed,” he told reporters. “We can blow up a lab, but nobody is gonna be in the lab, as opposed to everybody being in the lab and blowing it up.”

He did not elaborate on those remarks, however, leaving it unclear whether Washington had actually pushed for such major concessions at the negotiating table. The Islamic Republic would be unlikely to accept a deal under those terms.

Ali Shamkhani, a senior adviser to Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, later denounced Trump’s comments in a social media post, suggesting his proposal would cross Tehran’s “red lines.”

“Efforts to reach Iran’s nuclear plants and ‘blow up their facilities’ have been a dream of previous US presidents,” he wrote. “Iran is an independent state with a strong defense structure, a resilient people, and clear red lines. Negotiations are a means to progress and preserve national interests and honor, not submission and surrender.”

During the same news conference on Wednesday, Trump said he had urged Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to refrain from military action against Iran amid the ongoing nuclear talks, arguing the move would be “inappropriate” as the two sides were “very close to a solution.” He went on to claim that a new agreement could be reached with Tehran in “a couple weeks,” though his previous assessments have proven overly optimistic.

Keep reading

Iran Will Hold US Responsible For Any Israeli Attack On Nuclear Sites: Foreign Minister

Earlier this week CNN had issued an alarming report claiming that Israel is currently preparing possible preemptive strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. It underscored that at this moment it has become very clear that Netanyahu could care less about ‘pressure’ from Western allies the US, UK, and Canada regarding the Gaza crisis. Israel continues to essentially be at war on multiple fronts.

Parallel to all of this, Washington and Iran have been engaged in productive talks on potentially reaching a fresh nuclear deal – which the Netanyahu fundamentally sees as but an Iranian ploy to buy time as it secretly develops nukes (in Tel Aviv’s thinking). But Iran’s leaders are calling for the United States to essentially ‘keep its dog on a leash’ – as Israel wishes to torpedo a deal.

In fresh statements, Iran now says it will hold the United States responsible in the event of an unprovoked Israeli attack on its nuclear energy sites. Certainly any such attacks would completely derail efforts to reset relations with Washington.

“Iran strongly warns against any adventurism by the Zionist regime of Israel and will decisively respond to any threat or unlawful act by this regime,” Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated in a letter addressed to United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres.

“I have called on the international community to take effective preventive measures against the continuation of Israeli threats, which if unchecked, will compel Iran to take special measures in defense of our nuclear facilities and materials,” Araghchi said.

And as cited in Reuters:

Araqchi said Iran would view Washington as a “participant” in any such attack, and Tehran would have to adopt “special measures” to protect its nuclear sites and material if threats continued, and the watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency would be subsequently informed of such steps.

“The nature, content, and extent of our actions will correspond and be proportionate to preventive measures taken by these international bodies in accordance with their statutory duties and obligations,” the Iranian top diplomat added.

Washington and Tehran are gearing up for a fifth round of nuclear talks to be held in Rome this Friday.

Lately the Ayatollah has weighed in following reports that Iran is ready to halt enrichment altogether and in return get sanctions lifted. Ali Khamenei had called the latest US demands that Iranian enrichment be taken down to zero “excessive and outrageous,” according to state media on Tuesday. He further expressed doubts that current nuclear talks with the Trump administration will actually lead anywhere.

Meanwhile in Tehran, the parliament has “reaffirmed the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program, saying that the Islamic Republic has never sought, nor will it seek, to build an atomic bomb.”

Keep reading

Israel Preparing Possible Preemptive Attack On Iranian Nuclear Facilities: US Intelligence

At a moment it has become very clear that Netanyahu could care less about ‘pressure’ from Western allies the US, UK, and Canada, there are breaking reports Tuesday evening that a preemptive Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear sites could be imminent. According to CNN:

The US has obtained new intelligence suggesting that Israel is making preparations to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, even as the Trump administration has been pursuing a diplomatic deal with Tehran, multiple US officials familiar with the latest intelligence told CNN.

Such a strike would be a brazen break with President Donald Trump, US officials said. It could also risk tipping off a broader regional conflict in the Middle East — something the US has sought to avoid since the war in Gaza inflamed tensions beginning in 2023.

The same report underscores that no ‘final decision’ has been made yet, and this is perhaps another ploy by the Israelis to show the West and the Mideast region that it means business, in the wake of “Israel’s 9/11” – the Oct.7, 2023 Hamas terror attacks. 

The late in the day headline resulted in an immediate spike in oil prices… 

The United Kingdom on Tuesday suspended its free-trade agreement negotiations with Israel over the growing Gaza crisis, and after British Prime Minister Keir Starmer expressed disgust at newly expanded Israeli military operations in the Gaza Strip, also as famine threats at least 500,000 Palestinians.

Starmer described that he and his French and Canadian counterparts are “horrified” by the Netanyahu government’s escalation in Gaza. This also comes as international headlines and warnings grow more dire. For example Al Jazeera has the following new headline: “Starving Palestinians resort to eating animal feed, flour mixed with sand”.

“We repeat our demand for a ceasefire as the only way to free the hostages, we repeat our opposition to settlements in the West Bank, and we repeat our demand to massively scale up humanitarian assistance into Gaza,” Starmer told parliament.

Keep reading

‘Zero enrichment’ fantasies will lead us to war

President Donald Trump told reporters Monday that “very good things” are happening in his nuclear diplomacy with Iran, adding, “I think they’re being very reasonable thus far.” His optimistic tone was echoed by Iranian diplomats and Omani mediators, with Iran’s foreign minister describing the talks this weekend as “more serious” and “more detailed” than past meetings. Yet behind the upbeat rhetoric, a more complex and challenging reality is taking shape.

While earlier rounds made progress toward limiting—though not eliminating—Iran’s nuclear enrichment, even prompting parallel technical discussions, the latest round saw a slight reversal. The setback stemmed from the U.S. insistence on the unrealistic demand that Iran abandon domestic enrichment entirely.

Shutting down Iran’s more than 20,600 centrifuges is not required to achieve Trump’s stated goal of preventing an Iranian nuclear weapon. Nonetheless, it remains a long-standing demand of hardliners such as George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Nikki Haley, Mike Pompeo, and John Bolton. Many of them understood that insisting on total Iranian capitulation was the quickest path to derailing diplomacy and laying the groundwork for war.

There are several reasons why Trump should not allow himself to be pushed into pursuing the zero-enrichment fantasy.

First, this goal has not only proven unattainable but also counterproductive, gifting Iran more time to advance its program while delaying the constraints a realistic, verification-based agreement would impose.

In 2003, Iran proposed to the U.S. a comprehensive deal aimed at resolving all major disputes, including limits on its enrichment program. At the time, Tehran had just 164 centrifuges, no stockpile of low-enriched uranium, and no capability to enrich above 3.67 percent—sufficient for civilian fuel but far below the 90 percent required for nuclear weapons.

As I describe in Treacherous Alliance, the Bush administration not only ignored the proposal but also punished the Swiss ambassador in Tehran for delivering Iran’s diplomatic overture to Washington. For Bush, nothing short of zero enrichment and regime change in Iran was acceptable.

In the absence of a deal, Iran’s nuclear program steadily expanded. By 2006, it was operating over 3,000 centrifuges. The Bush administration reluctantly agreed to support European-led talks but imposed a fatal precondition: Iran had to halt enrichment before negotiations could begin. Predictably, diplomacy stalled—and Iran’s program advanced unchecked.

By the time Barack Obama took office in 2009, Iran was operating 8,000 centrifuges and had stockpiled 1,500 kg of low-enriched uranium—enough for one nuclear weapon if further enriched. Obama’s early diplomatic efforts faltered, but by 2012, secret talks in Oman produced a breakthrough since, for the first time, the U.S. signaled it would accept enrichment in Iran in exchange for strict limits and intrusive inspections.

This breakthrough paved the way for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal. By the time it was implemented, Iran had expanded its program to 19,000 centrifuges and amassed over 10,000 kg of low-enriched uranium.

Over the past two decades, the persistent demand for zero enrichment—an unachievable goal—has only resulted in a larger and more advanced Iranian nuclear program by postponing realistic, enforceable limits on enrichment.

While these delays were damaging in the past, they pose an even greater risk today amid the looming crisis over potential UN snapback sanctions. This is yet another reason why Trump should avoid falling into the zero-enrichment trap.

Keep reading

Iran Rejects ‘Unacceptable’ US Demand To Dismantle Nuclear Sites

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has thrown cold water on the possibility of dismantling its nuclear facilities, which Tehran maintains are only for peaceful domestic energy purposes.

But top US officials have called for just that. Starting earlier this month Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that Iran has to ‘walk away’ from uranium enrichment and long-range missile development, while Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff just days ago went further, asserting that Iran’s uranium enrichment facilities “have to be dismantled” for Washington to trust that it does not want nuclear arms.

Pezeshkian in the fresh comments blasted the demand as “unacceptable” and framed it as a matter of national sovereignty and independent development.

“The discussion that has been raised about dismantling Iran’s entire nuclear facilities is unacceptable to us,” the Iranian president said, adding that “Iran will not give up its peaceful nuclear rights.“

Still, the country’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi acknowledged Sunday that negotiations with the United States in Oman had become “much more serious and frank” – which suggests positive momentum toward restoring a deal or at least an understanding on which to build a working relationship with Washington.

Araqchi in the comments given to Iran’s state-run IRIB TV characterized “forward-moving” talks with the US over an array of complex nuclear-related issues.

This is despite last Thursday’s provocative comments given to Breitbart wherein bluntly stated, “They cannot have centrifuges. They have to downblend all of their fuel that they have there and send it to a far-away place.”

Keep reading

Iran Offers More Nuclear Transparency In Exchange For Lifting Sanctions

Iran says that ready to make its nuclear program more transparent at a moment it is preparing to send representatives for a third round of talks with the United States, set for April 26.

Iranian government spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani said Tuesday that Tehran in return for this greater transparency wants US-led sanctions lifted.

“We will try to create more transparency and more trust [in the nuclear program] in exchange for lifting sanctions. In other words, in exchange for lifting sanctions — I emphasize, in a way that is effective and has a [positive] effect on people’s lives — Iran is ready to create more trust in its nuclear program and more transparency,” Mohajerani told reporters.

Mohajerani made clear that Tehran is ready to reach “good agreement” with the United States on nuclear issue. “We are confident that reaching a good agreement in a short time while respecting our national interests is realistic,” she said, calling the prior two rounds “good” amid a “constructive” atmosphere.

The day prior to these optimistic remarks, Iran’s Foreign Ministry warned that Israel was seeking to “undermine” the ongoing nuclear talks with Washington, amid reports in Israeli media that leaders are mulling a ‘limited’ attack on the Islamic Republic.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Monday that a “kind of coalition is forming… to undermine and disrupt the diplomatic process” and that the “Zionist regime is at the center of this effort.”

Alluding to reports from last week of an internal US administration split on Iran, Baghaei further warned that hawks in the US are also involved in the effort to sabotage the talks. “Alongside it are a series of warmongering currents in the United States and figures from different factions,” he said.

Keep reading

Israel still eyeing a limited attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities

Israel has not ruled out an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the coming months despite President Donald Trump telling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that the U.S. was for now unwilling to support such a move, according to an Israeli official and two other people familiar with the matter.

Israeli officials have vowed to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and Netanyahu has insisted that any negotiation with Iran must lead to the complete dismantling of its nuclear program.

U.S. and Iranian negotiators are set for a second round of preliminary nuclear talks in Rome on Saturday.

Over the past months, Israel has proposed to the Trump administration a series of options to attack Iran’s facilities, including some with late spring and summer timelines, the sources said. The plans include a mix of airstrikes and commando operations that vary in severity and could set back Tehran’s ability to weaponize its nuclear program by just months or a year or more, the sources said.

The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Trump told Netanyahu in a White House meeting earlier this month that Washington wanted to prioritize diplomatic talks with Tehran and that he was unwilling to support a strike on the country’s nuclear facilities in the short term.

But Israeli officials now believe that their military could instead launch a limited strike on Iran that would require less U.S. support. Such an attack would be significantly smaller than those Israel initially proposed.

It is unclear if or when Israel would move forward with such a strike, especially with talks on a nuclear deal getting started. Such a move would likely alienate Trump and could risk broader U.S. support for Israel.

Keep reading

Israel considers ‘limited strike’ on Iran – Reuters

Israel is considering a “limited strike” on Iran’s nuclear facilities in the coming months, despite Washington’s refusal to support military action, Reuters reported on Saturday, citing sources familiar with the matter. The deliberations come as the second round of US-Iran negotiations have concluded in Rome, with expert-level talks expected to continue on April 26 in Oman.

According to Reuters, Israeli officials are weighing a “limited strike” that would require minimal US support – unlike the larger and prolonged bombing campaign previously under consideration.

West Jerusalem reportedly presented Washington with several strike options, “including some with late spring and summer timelines.” A senior Israeli official told the outlet that no final decision had been made.

On Wednesday, The New York Times reported that US President Donald Trump had rejected an Israeli proposal for “extensive” strikes, opting instead to pursue diplomacy.

“I’m not in a rush to do it, because I think that Iran has a chance to have a great country and to live happily without death, and I’d like to see that. That’s my first option,” Trump told reporters on Thursday.

Keep reading

Witkoff indicates US seeks to cap Iran uranium enrichment, not dismantle nuclear program

US special envoy to the Mideast Steve Witkoff appeared to use a key component of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal signed during the Obama administration as a reference point for the ongoing talks with Tehran, in comments that seemed to indicate the US is looking to limit rather than dismantle Tehran’s nuclear program.

The deal, which US President Donald Trump abandoned in 2018 and has long criticized, barred Iran from enriching its uranium beyond 3.67 percent as part of a framework intended to prevent the Islamic Republic from obtaining a weapon.

“The president means what he says, which is: Iran cannot have a bomb,” Witkoff told Fox News in a Monday interview, elaborating that the ongoing “conversation” with Iran would be about enrichment and weaponization, with the imperative to verify any agreed commitments.

“Iran “do[es] not need to enrich past 3.67%. In some circumstances, they’re at 60%, in other circumstances 20%. That cannot be,” he said. “You do not need to run — as they claim — a civil nuclear program where you’re enriching past 3.67%.”

Enriching uranium from 60% to the 90% needed for a weapon is a relatively short technical step.

Keep reading