Iran calls report on alleged secret nuclear weapons site politically motivated

Iran’s mission to the United Nations on Thursday rejected a Fox News report on an alleged secret nuclear weapons facility in Semnan Province, calling it “fabricated” and accusing the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) of spreading false information.

“This fabricated report follows the usual pattern of the NCRI terrorist group, which produces fake reports in the form of so-called intelligence and delivers them to Western services, including in the United States,” the Iranian mission said in a statement carried by state news agency IRNA.

“When these services realize the reports are baseless, the group then turns to Western media to amplify them,” it added.

Fox News earlier reported, based on satellite images and information from the NCRI, that the “Rainbow Site” has been operating for more than a decade under the cover of a chemical company and is used for tritium extraction — a process with “virtually no peaceful or commercial applications” and known to be “used to enhance nuclear weapons.”

Satellite images obtained by Fox News show what appears to be a previously undisclosed Iranian nuclear weapons facility in Semnan Province, according to the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).

The site, known as the “Rainbow Site,” has reportedly been in operation for over a decade and covers nearly 2,500 acres. It has operated under the cover of a chemical company called Diba Energy Siba, the group said.

According to NCRI, the facility’s main purpose is the extraction of tritium, a radioactive isotope used to enhance nuclear weapons.

"Unlike uranium enrichment, tritium has virtually no peaceful or commercial applications, casting further doubt on Iran’s longstanding claims that its nuclear ambitions are solely for energy or civilian use," Fox News wrote.

US President Donald Trump held a private meeting on Thursday with Israeli Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer, a close adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Axios reported, citing two sources briefed on the meeting.

The meeting, which was not announced by either side, took place at the White House ahead of Trump’s trip to the Middle East starting Monday.

According to Axios, Trump and Dermer discussed Iran’s nuclear program and the war in Gaza. The outlet also reported that the next round of US-Iran nuclear talks will be held on Sunday in Muscat.

Trump is scheduled to visit Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. He will not stop in Israel during the trip.

Trump, speaking on Wednesday, said he had yet to decide on the matter and would announce his position during an upcoming trip to the Middle East. “I don’t want to hurt anybody’s feelings,” he added.

Reports—first published by the Associated Press—about potential plans to officially adopt the name "Arabian Gulf" in official US parlance have drawn sharp criticism from Iranian officials and also sparked widespread backlash across social media.

Reactions have cut across political lines, uniting unlikely voices in outrage. Iranians across the political spectrum, from Islamic Republic apparatchiks to the US-based exiled prince viewed any such move as an affront to their historical and national identity.

Common cause

Describing the Persian Gulf as “the strongest factor in uniting the Iranian people” in a post on X, reformist former vice president Mohammad-Ali Abtahi warned about a negative impact of renaming on Tehran-Washington nuclear talks.

Even those who support negotiations with the US, Abtahi said, would be forced to stand in opposition.

Veteran diaspora opposition figure Mohsen Sazegara told Iran International TV that the move could be a boon to a hard Iranian line in talks.

"Trump would provide Khamenei with a great opportunity to use Iranians’ sense of nationalism to his own benefit," he said. "(It's) the best lever Khamenei has to back out of the negotiations."

Exiled crown prince Reza Pahlavi also said in a statement: “The reported decision by President Trump to abrogate history, should it be true, is an affront to the people of Iran and our great civilization."

“But, once again, the true culprit of this shameful act is Ali Khamenei and his anti-Iranian regime who have so weakened our nation that foreign powers dare make such transgressions against Iran’s national identity and world history."

The exiled opposition group Mujahedin-e Khalq also issued a statement warning that any effort to change the name of the Persian Gulf would only benefit Khamenei, giving him an opportunity to deflect from domestic dissent and redirect public anger toward a foreign enemy.

Some analysts suggest the controversy may be part of a deliberate psychological tactic to destabilize Iran’s negotiating position.

Shahram Kholdi, a Canada-based Iran analyst, pointed to Trump’s close ties with Arab states and argued the maneuver could be strategic. “Trump uses every tactic to psychologically confuse the other side and gain points,” he told Iran International TV.

Pressure to exit talks

Iran’s ultra-hardliners, who had tempered their opposition to US negotiations after Khamenei’s tacit endorsement, are now urging the government to withdraw from the talks.

Naser Mesdaghi, a journalist, urged President Masoud Pezeshkian to immediately walk away from the talks if the US deviates from historical nomenclature.

“All Iranians support this decision and will endure the hardship of sanctions and war for the sake of Iran’s integrity,” he said in a post on X.

Tehran-based commentator Ali Nasri went further, framing the issue as part of a broader disinformation campaign. “This ridiculous rumor … is the next stage of psychological warfare,” he posted on X.

"Having failed to stop the negotiations, the Israel lobby and its affiliated diaspora opposition are now trying to poison and anger public opinion at every stage.”

Despite Tehran agreeing to expanded inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the dispute over enrichment has cast doubt over the timing and direction of the next round of negotiations, originally scheduled to resume this week after being delayed in Oman.

“Iran has accepted strict and intensive inspections by IAEA inspectors, and the two sides have reached an understanding on verification and control mechanisms,” an Iranian diplomatic source familiar with the talks said on condition of anonymity.

“The key disagreement is over Iran’s right to enrich uranium domestically—something the American side opposes,” the source said, adding that the US team's shifting goals were complicating the negotiations.

“In every round, the Americans bring up new topics—missiles, proxies—without a consistent framework.”

A second diplomatic source confirmed that Iran had agreed to restrain its regional allies, including by asking the Houthis to temporarily halt attacks, partly to deny Israel what he called a "pretext" to obstruct diplomacy.

US officials contacted by Iran International declined to comment on the specifics of the talks but acknowledged the urgency and fragility of the moment.

“Time is short and we need to make progress quickly. To make that happen, the Iranians need to negotiate in good faith and sincerely desire to reach a deal,” a State Department spokesperson told Iran International.

Internal Divisions in Tehran

Meanwhile Iran too has fissures of its own on the talks dossier, with hardliners continuing to criticize the talks but negotiators still appearing determined to clinch a fair deal to avoid war.

“There’s a difference between building media credibility and childish competition for scoops,” Mohammad Hossein Ranjbaran, an adviser to Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi, posted on X on Tuesday.

“Agencies and esteemed officials who receive classified reports must protect them. Leaking information to favored outlets undermines national interests,” he added, in an apparent reference to a report published the day before by Nour News, a site close to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s adviser Ali Shamkhani.

The outlet cited an anonymous source saying the fourth round of talks would focus on “humanitarian and security concerns," without elaborating, suggesting that the negotiations had expanded beyond the nuclear dossier—something never mentioned by officials involved in the talks.

A diplomatic source told Iran International that unauthorized disclosures could undermine the Iranian negotiating team.