Iran Statement at the IAEA Board of Governer: 10 June 2026

Statement of H.E. Mr. Reza Najafi before adoption of the resolution on the NPT Safeguards Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran

Statement by H.E. Mr. Reza Najafi,

Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran

Before the Board of Governors of the IAEA

On the NPT Safeguards Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran

(Vienna, 10 June 2026)

 

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

Mr. Chair,

Our comments and reservations regarding the content of the report of Director General are set out in the Explanatory Note submitted by the Islamic Republic of Iran and circulated as document INFCIRC/1380.

Distinguished Delegates

Last June, exactly the day after the adoption of this Board’s legally flawed resolution on Iran; our peaceful safeguarded nuclear facilities were unlawfully attacked by the US-Israeli regime.

Well in advance of the attacks, their possibility had been reported to the IAEA Secretariat, which unfortunately described such serious threats as Iran’s “perceived threats.”

In their two joint criminal aggressions since then, the US-Israeli regime conducted 17 waves of multiple attacks against our safeguarded peaceful nuclear facilities. The US President said they destroyed some of them just “for fun!”

They also brutally assassinated 17 of our universities’ scientists, even with their families. Only in one case, a scientist was assassinated with 17 members of his extended family, including three boys of 7, 13 and 17 years old, and two girls of 8 and 14 years old.

They brutally assassinated our Supreme Leader and many of our officials, and conducted mass killing of our civilians, one example was the barbaric killing of 168 children of 7 to 12 years old in a primary school in Minab.

The attacks conducted under the false narrative of stopping Iran’s nuclear weapon program, but not even one gram of nuclear material in Iran was diverted and according to the IAEA SIR 2024, more than 72% of the Agency’s verification activities in States with CSAs but without APs, carried out only in Iran, draining more than 56% of the Agency’s annual verification budget, while Iran possesses only 3% of the world’s nuclear facilities.

Yet, last November, this Board adopted another politically motivated resolution, urging Iran to provide the Agency with “precise information on nuclear material.” The Board acted in a manner as if nothing had happened to Iran’s nuclear facilities and materials had not been buried under the rubbles, and there were no daily threats by the aggressors to bomb those facilities again!

That resolution lacked even a single-word reference to such unprecedented attacks in the Agency’s history, and it seemed that from the sponsors’ view everything was in order!

The statistics of the Agency of post 2025 attacks indicate Iran’s full cooperation with the IAEA to inspect unimpacted nuclear sites.

However, for quite obvious reasons, including the persistent threats of attack as well as lack of established procedures for conducting verification in such unprecedented situations access to the impacted sites was not possible.

It is also noteworthy that while Iran and the Agency reached an understanding on such procedures in Cairo, the unlawful acts of US-E3, including their act in introducing a new resolution last November rendered it useless.

Distinguished Delegates

In the past nearly 25 years, Iran had been subjected to the most robust and extensive verification in the Agency’s history – which, in and of itself, represents the highest level of our cooperation; we had accepted and implemented many confidence building measures, as well as certain commitments much beyond the requirements of the CSA and AP.

And above all, while the only technical reason for any legitimate proliferation concern is the “diversion of nuclear material” from peaceful uses, to date, the Agency has never reported the diversion of even ONE gram of nuclear material in Iran.

The two joint criminal aggressions of the US-Israeli regime against Iran in 2025 and 2026, and the clear objectives they publicly declared for these unlawful wars, namely destroying Iran and grabbing its oil and gas, made it crystal clear that all their claims that Iran pursues nuclear weapons, and all 25 years of verifications, consideration of the subject, issuance of reports, and adoption of resolutions, had been exclusively a pretext to justify a long-planned joint aggression.

Reviewing similar historical developments reveals that, only the methods of aggressors has changed over time from showing slides and “vials” of so-called biological weapons in UNSC, to equating 440 kilograms of 60 percent enriched uranium under the Agency’s full supervision and control, with 440 of the most destructive nuclear weapons ever developed. This is their Weapons of Mass Deception (WMD).

How can an organization be trusted when it has long been instrumentalized, and is not even able to express a simple concern when the unprecedented attacks on safeguarded nuclear facilities in its history takes place?

How can an institution be relied upon while its work is primarily guided by political considerations of a certain group of States not legal principles, technical standards and professionalism?

How can the technical nature of this Agency’s work be trusted, when it operates under the influence of certain members, and even overrules its prior conclusion of the final assessment?

How can the IAEA be hoped for, when it is unable even to defend itself against simultaneous severe attacks on its two pillars of “peaceful uses” and “safeguards,” and when it has been abused to demonize the very inherent right, the promotion of which constitutes this institution’s raison d'être?

The answers are clear for each and every one of the IAEA Members. For far too long, this Agency has been and is grappling with serious challenges, unprecedented in its history. It faces a trust and confidence deficit as well as legitimacy crisis. It has been caught in the vicious circle of extrabudgetary financial contributions along with political orders and demands, which undermines its independence, authority, reputation and professionalism.

It is unable to resist against those States whose ultimate goal is to strip it from “peaceful uses” function and transform it solely to a so-called “nuclear watchdog” institution!

Before concluding, I invite delegations to reflect carefully on a number of public statements made by the US President, including references to bringing Iran “back to the stone ages,” assertions that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again,” threats that Iran would face “Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one,” warnings that Iranians would be “living in Hell,” and that the US conducted certain strikes and killing Iranians  “just for fun.”

Similarly, the US Secretary of War! publicly stated that the US does not fight with “stupid rules of engagement” and declared: “We will keep pressing. We will keep pushing, keep advancing, no quarter, no mercy for our enemies.” This alone constitutes a war crime.

These statements require no further commentary. They speak volumes about the current state of the international system.

The E3 statements were almost indistinguishable from those of the US-Israeli regime, and again indicated that they have chosen alignment over independence, confrontation over cooperation, and pressure over diplomacy.

As a result of continuous strategic miscalculations, flawed assumptions, imprudent policies, and unwise decisions, they have largely surrendered the role they once desired to play.

My last sentences are directed only to this Board’s Members.

Distinguished colleagues!  

Both aggressions of the US-Israeli regime against Iran’s peaceful safeguarded nuclear facilities conducted following the adoption by this Board of two US-E3 proposed resolutions in last June and November. The aggressors subsequently abused the votes of supporters for those legally flawed resolutions in the worst possible form that is to justify their criminal aggressions, to destroy our civilian infrastructures, and to kill thousands of our peoples.

The draft resolution before you is proposed by the US – the aggressor. Despite the sponsor’s assertions, it is not a technical resolution; it has been proposed ill-intendedly and definitely is a follow-up to its aggressions.

Board Members, therefore, should consider carefully whether supporting this resolution would advance safeguards and diplomacy, or whether it would merely contribute to yet another cycle of escalation, and instability.

The sponsors of this resolution must bear responsibility for the consequences of their actions. The Islamic Republic of Iran will continue to act in accordance with its international obligations; however, it will not hesitate to defend its people, protect its inherent rights, safeguard its sovereignty and security, and preserve its national interests by all means.

I thank you, Mr. Chair.