Iran Statement at the Special Session of the IAEA Board of Governors

Statement by Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran

At the Special Session of the Board of Governors of the IAEA

(Vienna, 5 June 2026)

In the Name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful

Mr. Chairman,

This meeting addresses a matter of utmost importance: attacks against safeguarded nuclear facilities. The gravest, most extensive and unprecedented armed attacks against peaceful nuclear facilities in the IAEA’s history have been conducted against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The first time that the IAEA considered such acts was after the Israeli attack on an Iraqi nuclear installation. In its 12 June 1981 resolution, this Board strongly condemned the attack, and recommended suspension of any assistance to the Israeli regime as well as its membership. The GC described it as “an attack against the Agency and its safeguards,” and suspended provision of assistance to that regime, but fell short of suspending its membership. Later, the declassified documents of the US revealed that the American pressure and their threat of cutting budget had been the main cause.

Moreover, in a number of resolutions and decisions adopted from 1981 to 2009, the General Conference reaffirmed that any attack or threat against peaceful nuclear facilities constitute a violation of UN Charter, international law and IAEA Statute.

Likewise, UNGA condemned the attack on Iraq’s nuclear installation that constituted an “act of aggression” and a violation of the UN Charter. Additionally, through its resolution 487, the UN Security Council considered the Israeli attack as a threat to the IAEA safeguards system, and obliged the regime to “refrain in the future from any such acts or threats thereof.” But Israeli regime has defied it repeatedly.

Mr. Chairman,

In their illegal acts of aggression in 2025 and 2026, the US – a nuclear-weapon State– and the Israeli regime – an outlaw nuclear-weapon-possessor – carried out 17 waves of multiple attacks against Iranian safeguarded nuclear facilities. One of the gravest attacks was targeting a structure just 350 meters away from the reactor of the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant with human casualties. After all, US high-ranking officials had publicly threatened to attack Iranian nuclear power plants! This Plant hosts thousands of kilograms of nuclear materials, and as the IAEA DG stated, a direct hit thereto could result in a “very high release of radioactivity to the environment.”

Any such attack is a material breach of a peremptory norm of international law, namely the “prohibition of aggression”. Crime of aggression as well as war crime entail international responsibility and individual criminal responsibility of the perpetrators.

Mr. Chairman,

The most relevant resolutions of GC on prohibition of attacks on nuclear installations are resolutions 444 and 533, both of which proposed by the Islamic Republic of Iran. Conversely, the United States opposed both.

Such attacks seriously violate the very objects and purposes of the NPT and the IAEA Statute, undermine the relevance and credibility of the global non-proliferation architecture, in particular the IAEA safeguards system, and deteriorate the foundations of international peace and security. The world must prevent their normalization. Otherwise, in addition to our security, the main victim would be the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. This must be done systematically; avoiding politicization, selective approach or double standard.

Finally, we must adopt a “zero-tolerance policy” towards such attacks. We must promote the adherence to, and effectiveness of, the existing norms on the inviolability of peaceful nuclear activities. New international norms must also be established to absolutely prohibit attacks or threats against safeguarded nuclear installations under any and all circumstances.

We believe it is reasonable to expect the Director General, particularly as a candidate for the position of Secretary General of the United Nations, to adhere to established United Nations terminology and to use the official names of geographical features as reflected in relevant UN documents as also historical documents. Such consistency is important for preserving the impartiality, professionalism and credibility expected of senior international officials.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman.