Iran was on the verge of building an atomic bomb, what does Netanyahu claim?

BarcelonaIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has justified the attack on Iran as a preemptive action to halt Iran's nuclear program, and has asserted that Tehran already has the capacity to build no fewer than nine atomic bombs. Tel Aviv claims it has presented the evidence to the United States, but it has not been made public. Inside and outside Israel, however, he is accused of having acted now to derail the Iranian nuclear program. ongoing negotiations between the Trump administration and the Ayatollahs' regime, to drag the Pentagon into a war against Tehran and to divert attention from the genocide in Gaza, which his allies had begun to criticizeIsrael claims that Iran has been on the verge of becoming a nuclear power for twenty years, and now its attacks have gone far beyond nuclear facilities and point to an attempt at regime change.

But how close was Iran to having atomic weapons? Alejandro Zurita, who until 2016 directed the International Cooperation Programme in Nuclear Research of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), has no doubt: "It is incorrect that Iran could imminently have atomic weapons," he explains in a conversation with ARA. Technically, he points out, Tehran would be in a stage called "nuclear latency." The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) considers that Iran had attained the capacity to enrich uranium up to 60%, well above the civilian use of nuclear fuels used to power power plants or in medical applications. "If you have a uranium enrichment facility, you can stop enriching at just over 3% for nuclear power plants, and at 20% for search reactors, or continue up to 90%, which is what is needed to produce an atomic bomb, but it has been known for some time that Iran is at 60%," Zurita points out.

This is the same claim made by the United States secret services. On March 25, Tulsi Gabbard, US Director of Intelligence, explained to a Senate committee that the uranium enrichment agency was not seeking to develop atomic bombs, although she admitted that those who advocated doing so were "occupying positions of power" and that Tehran had reached an "unprecedented" level of enrichment. The IAEA published a 22-page report this week in which it also did not speak of imminent danger, but warned that its inspectors had not been able to access some facilities and therefore could not verify whether certain parts of the civilian program could be susceptible to military use.

For the expert, the key is what happened in 2018, when Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the nuclear agreement that his predecessor, Barack Obama, had signed with the ayatollahs' regime, in a diplomatic effort coordinated with the European Union and the other permanent members of the Council (Britain) plus Germany. That agreement "eliminated the possibility of Iran reaching high levels of uranium enrichment" and, therefore, developing atomic bombs. How? On the one hand, because Iran accepted the permanent presence of IAEA inspectors at its nuclear facilities, and on the other because international collaboration mechanisms were established for the civilian nuclear program, limited to energy and research. "Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has the same right to nuclear energy as Spain," Zurita recalls. Israel, on the other hand, is not a signatory to this agreement and, according to the international military research center SIPRI, has 90 nuclear warheads in its arsenals.

It was in Iran's interest to reach an agreement because it allowed it to resolve a key problem for its internal stability: the international sanctions that were stifling the future of its youth and emerging middle class, turning the Persian country into a pariah state. "The Iranian regime wanted to remain in power. And the great powers took advantage of the opportunity to resolve a problem that threatened the stability of the entire region: Iran having atomic weapons. It was a win-win", Zurita summarizes.

Netanyahu, always against the agreement

The world's major military powers gave the regime breathing space to avoid further problems, and the only one who stood against it was Benjamin Netanyahu. When Trump first took office, he caved to Israeli pressure and dismantled the agreement. He unilaterally withdrew and imposed even harsher sanctions on Iran (forcing the suspension of contracts with companies like Boeing, eager to enter a new market that needed to catch up). This fueled the most extremist voices in Iran, who returned to power in the 2021 elections. Under the sanctions and the new radical leadership, Iran resumed enriching uranium. Zurita believes, like most experts, that Iran "did this primarily to have a leverage tool in the negotiations."

When the Democrats regained the White House with Joe Biden, there was a resurgence of negotiations, and the EU, under Josep Borrell, attempted to revive the deal. But in February 2022, Putin began the invasion of Ukraine, and Iran, which had found in the strategic alliance with China and Moscow a way to alleviate US sanctions, sided with Putin, who provided it with drones, for example. And everything escalated after the Palestinian attacks of October 7, 2023, which Netanyahu also blamed on Iran, accusing it of acting indirectly through Hamas.

But Trump had promised to bring peace to the Middle East and since arriving at the White House had resumed talks with Tehran. In fact, the Israeli attack came 48 hours before Oman was to host the fifth round of talks, scheduled for this Sunday. Iran demanded that the agreement be irreversible and mean the end of sanctions, while the United States wanted to limit its enrichment capacity to 3%. But Netanyahu refused and has once again imposed a fait accompli.

The impact of the attacks

Zurita warns of the danger posed by Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities. "The risk is very high, but it all depends on the type of facility and the damage caused." The IAEA has confirmed that the surface of the Natanz uranium enrichment plant has been destroyed, but has no evidence that the attacks have affected the underground portion, where the centrifuges that enrich uranium are located. "In an enrichment plant, there are no nuclear fission products, but if it is destroyed, there is material such as uranium hexafluoride that, if inhaled or ingested, causes significant damage to the human body," he warns. The Esfahan scientific reactor has also suffered attacks. In a facility like this, Zurita warns, "there could be significant radiological spillover, which would be like the Fukushima accident on a smaller scale."