Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster?

Middle East warAdd to myFTGet instant alerts for this topic

Manage your delivery channels hereRemove from myFTCould strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster?Israel’s attacks on uranium enrichment facilities have caused localised radioactivity, but contamination appears limited

A worker inside a uranium conversion facility near the city of Isfahan in central Iran

A worker inside a uranium conversion facility near the Iranian city of Isfahan in 2005 © Getty Images

Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster? on x (opens in a new window)
Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster? on facebook (opens in a new window)
Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster? on linkedin (opens in a new window)
Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster? on whatsapp (opens in a new window)
Save

Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster? on x (opens in a new window)
Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster? on facebook (opens in a new window)
Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster? on linkedin (opens in a new window)
Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster? on whatsapp (opens in a new window)
Save

Michael Peel in London

PublishedJune 18 2025

Jump to comments sectionPrint this pageUnlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Israel’s air strikes on Iran’s nuclear programme have raised fears of contamination from radiation and toxic chemicals.

The director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the global watchdog, has branded the targeting of nuclear infrastructure “deeply concerning”.

Military escalation ‘‘increases the chance of a radiological release with serious consequences for people and the environment’’, Rafael Grossi said on Tuesday.

Assaults on nuclear facilities pose evident safety risks, but Israel’s attacks appear to have avoided the most dangerous targets such as power plants, scientists say.

Here’s what we know so far.

Have the air strikes triggered any nuclear contamination?

The attack on the Natanz uranium enrichment facility has caused localised radioactivity, Iranian and international nuclear authorities have said, but it does not appear to be severe.

The IAEA, in two assessments this week, said Israel’s strikes had damaged both underground enrichment halls at Natanz and above-ground facilities including a pilot fuel enrichment plant. Grossi said these had caused some contamination.

But radiation levels outside the Natanz complex remained unchanged and at normal levels, indicating “no external radiological impact to the population or the environment”, Grossi said on Monday.

The radioactive contamination in the facility primarily comprises alpha particles, which Grossi said could be “effectively managed” with appropriate protection such as respiratory devices.

Alpha radiation can cause severe damage to internal living tissue if the source is inhaled or enters the body through a wound. But alpha particles’ effects are very short-range, so if they remain outside the body they are generally blocked by human skin.

Off-site radiation levels also remained unchanged at the Isfahan nuclear site after a strike there on Friday, Grossi said. No damage had been reported at the Fordow fuel enrichment plant or the Khondab heavy water reactor under construction, he added.

Some content could not load. Check your internet connection or browser settings.

Could more severe radiation contamination occur, especially if air strikes continue?

Uranium itself is weakly radioactive. It is much more dangerous when it undergoes a fission reaction, such as in a nuclear reactor or bomb, that releases large amounts of energy and other radioactive chemicals. Neither the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant nor the Tehran Research Reactor had been targeted by the Israeli attacks, the IAEA said on Monday.

Outside the conditions found in nuclear reactors or waste reprocessing facilities, it would take a lot of enriched uranium to produce significant radioactivity problems, experts say.

“Very serious radioactive contamination is usually associated with other elements, like radioactive iodine or radiocaesium, which are the products of nuclear fission,” said Jim Smith, a professor in the school of the environment and life sciences at the UK’s University of Portsmouth.

Such fission products are especially hazardous because they infiltrate the food chain and build up in the bodies of animals, including humans.

Fission products were responsible for much of the devastating aftermath of the 1986 explosion at the Chornobyl nuclear plant in Ukraine, which was then under Soviet rule.

A satellite image of Natanz: radiation levels outside the complex remain unchanged and at normal levels, according to the IAEA © ©2025 Maxar Technologies/AFP/ Getty ImagesAre there other risks to consider in relation to Natanz or other facilities?

Another reason why complexes such as Natanz and Fordow may pose relatively low external radiation risks is that their cores are buried underground. This means that to destroy them would require firepower of an intensity perhaps beyond even Israel’s strongest weapons.

Even very powerful munitions would probably have to deliver multiple hits to fully “penetrate a hardened subterranean bunker” such as Natanz, said Simon Bennett, director of the University of Leicester’s civil safety and security unit.

“It is unlikely that there would be significant contamination beyond the confines of the site, for the simple reason that the enrichment facility or reactor would be buried in tonnes of earth and concrete,” Bennett said. “Further, those who run the site would have been trained in radiation monitoring and mitigation techniques.”

A strike on the stores of highly enriched uranium thought to be held at Isfahan might create an environmental contamination risk, experts said. The damage at Isfahan was to the central chemical laboratory, a uranium conversion plant, a reactor fuel manufacturing plant and a metal processing facility under construction, the IAEA said.

Could the campaign of air strikes create other safety problems?

Chemical contamination may be the main problem caused by the attacks so far and to come, scientists say.

“The primary concern is chemical, and less so radiological,” said Kenneth Petersen, the 2023-24 president of the American Nuclear Society, a non-profit organisation representing specialists in the field.

One hazard is the possible release of uranium hexafluoride used in fuel enrichment and present at facilities such as Natanz and the Isfahan storage site.

Uranium hexafluoride presents limited risk if handled carefully at normal environmental temperatures. But contact with water — including in the air — can cause it to release the toxic hydrogen fluoride. This can spread as a gas and is potentially lethal if inhaled, as it forms highly corrosive hydrofluoric acid on contact with water in the body.

It was possible that uranium hexafluoride, uranyl fluoride and hydrogen fluoride were dispersed inside the Natanz facility, the IAEA said on Monday.

In 1986, an accidental explosion at a uranium conversion plant in Oklahoma killed a worker and released uranium hexafluoride, polluting soil and water for several miles around.

Smoke billows from explosions in Natanz after Israel announced it had carried out strikes on Iranian nuclear and military sites

The attack on Natanz has caused localised radioactivity, Iranian and international nuclear authorities have said © Irinn/AFP/Getty ImagesAre there international rules about attacks on nuclear facilities?

The IAEA has previously condemned armed attacks and threats against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes.

The general conference of the agency’s 180 member states — which include Israel and Iran — has said such actions breach its own rules, the principles of the UN charter and international law.

Israel argues Iran is trying to build an atomic weapon, which Tehran denies. The IAEA board on Thursday declared Iran had breached its nuclear non-proliferation obligations for the first time in two decades.

In 2022, Russia attacked and then occupied Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant as part of its full invasion of the country.

The IAEA warned the incident was “the first time a military conflict has occurred amid the facilities of a large, established nuclear power programme”.

Middle East war Add to myFT
Iran nuclear deal Add to myFT
Pollution Add to myFT
Nuclear energy Add to myFT
FT Edit Add to myFT

Comments

Comments have not been enabled for this article.

AP by OMG

Asian-Promotions.com | Buy More, Pay Less | Anywhere in Asia

Shop Smarter on AP Today | FREE Product Samples, Latest Discounts, Deals, Coupon Codes & Promotions | Direct Brand Updates every second | Every Shopper’s Dream!

Asian-Promotions.com or AP lets you buy more and pay less anywhere in Asia. Shop Smarter on AP Today. Sign-up for FREE Product Samples, Latest Discounts, Deals, Coupon Codes & Promotions. With Direct Brand Updates every second, AP is Every Shopper’s Dream come true! Stretch your dollar now with AP. Start saving today!

Originally posted on: https://www.ft.com/content/b717b84e-8cc8-48c8-9d8b-3a93c7198eee

Could strikes on Iran cause a nuclear disaster?

AP by OMG

Asian-Promotions.com | Buy More, Pay Less | Anywhere in Asia

Share

Categories

Share