Strike Fears
ISLAMABAD: Recent statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahuhave intensified speculation that Israel, with possible US backing, ispreparing the ground for renewed military action against Iran’s nuclearprogramme. Following a series of airstrikes in mid-2025 that targeted keyIranian facilities, Netanyahu has repeatedly highlighted the persistence ofapproximately 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 per cent purity, alevel perilously close to weapons-grade material. This stockpile, deemedsufficient for multiple nuclear devices if further processed, remains acentral concern despite the damage inflicted on enrichment sites. The callfor its immediate removal and rigorous inspections underscores a strategythat combines diplomatic pressure with the implicit threat of force,raising fears of another confrontation in the region.
The International Atomic Energy Agency has documented Iran’s accumulationof over 400 kilograms of 60 per cent enriched uranium as of mid-2025,marking a significant escalation from previous levels. This material,produced at facilities like Fordow and Natanz, represents a criticalthreshold because roughly 42 kilograms of such uranium could theoreticallyyield one nuclear weapon upon further enrichment to 90 per cent. Reportsindicate that Iran’s overall enriched uranium stockpile exceeded 9,000kilograms, far surpassing limits set by earlier agreements. The IAEA hasexpressed serious concern over Iran’s status as the only non-nuclear-weaponstate producing such highly enriched material, emphasising the absence ofcivilian justification for this level of enrichment. Netanyahu has seizedon these findings to argue that Tehran remains determined to advance itsnuclear ambitions, despite denials from Iranian officials who insist theprogramme serves peaceful purposes.
In the aftermath of the 12-day Israel-Iran conflict in June 2025, whichinvolved Israeli strikes followed by US participation targeting sitesincluding Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, the whereabouts of the enricheduranium became a focal point of uncertainty. Israeli intelligence suggestedthe material was not relocated prior to the attacks and may remainaccessible, albeit with difficulty, particularly at Isfahan. Netanyahu hasclaimed possession of “interesting intel” on its location, asserting thatwhile the strikes set back Iran’s capabilities by years, the retainedstockpile poses an ongoing threat. This narrative has been reinforcedthrough public statements, including during meetings with US leaders, wherethe emphasis shifted from complete destruction to control and removal ofthe material.
Diplomatic efforts between the United States and Iran, initiated earlier in2025, have stalled amid these developments. The US has pushed for zeroenrichment capabilities, while Israel insists on the dismantling of Iran’snuclear infrastructure. Netanyahu’s recent demands, reiterated in cabinetmeetings, call for the export or elimination of the 400-kilogram stockpilealongside stringent IAEA oversight of all nuclear sites. Such conditionsecho previous hardline positions, including calls for a Libya-style modelwhere enrichment is entirely halted. The suspension of IAEA cooperation byIran following the strikes has further complicated verification, leavingthe agency unable to fully account for the material and heighteningsuspicions of covert activities.
The strategic calculus appears to involve building international consensusfor stronger measures against Iran. By framing the retained uranium as anexistential risk, Israel seeks to justify potential future operations whilepressuring allies to support non-diplomatic options. Reports suggestdiscussions between Netanyahu and US officials have included scenarios forrenewed strikes in 2026, targeting remaining missile production and nuclearreconstitution efforts. This approach creates suspense around whetherdiplomacy will prevail or if military action will resume, as the enricheduranium serves as a persistent bargaining chip and red line for both sides.
Iran’s response has been defiant, with officials rejecting external demandsand emphasising sovereignty over its nuclear programme. The regime hasfaced internal challenges, including protests over economic hardshipsexacerbated by the conflict, yet it maintains that enrichment is a rightunder international law. The IAEA continues to urge a return toinspections, warning that without transparency, the risk of proliferationescalates. Observers note that the combination of damaged infrastructureand dispersed material complicates any rapid weaponisation, but the mereexistence of the stockpile sustains the cycle of threat perception.
Read Top Stories
The evolving situation carries broader implications for regional stabilityand global non-proliferation efforts. Should Israel and the US pursuefurther action to enforce removal of the material, it could trigger widerescalation involving Iran’s allies. Conversely, successful diplomacyleading to verifiable removal and oversight might de-escalate tensions. Fornow, Netanyahu’s insistent calls serve as a hook for sustained attention,keeping the international community on edge about the next phase in thisprotracted standoff.
Source: https://www.timesofisrael.com
Tags: Israel, United States, Iran, Benjamin Netanyahu, IAEA, EnrichedUranium
ogimageimage-name