Tehran releases explanatory note defending 60% enrichment
Iran has formally defended its enrichment of uranium to 60% purity in a public statement, insisting the activity is not prohibited under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Iran has formally defended its enrichment of uranium to 60% purity in a public statement, insisting the activity is not prohibited under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
The explanatory note, released ahead of a key meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors, criticized the agency’s latest report for relying on “unverified” and “politically influenced” sources, saying the findings reflect a “departure from the principles of impartiality and professionalism.”
“Enrichment to 60% is not banned by the NPT, and all related activities are declared and verifiable,” said the statement published on the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran's website.
Iran further said that traces of uranium found at certain undeclared sites may be the result of sabotage or hostile actions, citing findings by its own security investigations.
The IAEA report, leaked to Western media late last month, concluded that Iran now possesses over 400 kg of 60%-enriched uranium—enough, if further enriched, to build approximately 10 nuclear weapons. The report also cited ongoing Iranian non-cooperation on safeguards and expressed “serious concern” over the country’s continued enrichment at levels with “no civilian justification.”
Iran pushes back against pressure
Iranian officials condemned the IAEA’s findings. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said the report was based on “fabricated Israeli intelligence” and aimed at reopening matters previously closed under a 2015 resolution. He accused the agency of acting under political pressure from the United States and European powers.
In a phone call last week with IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called on the agency to “reflect realities” and warned that any politically driven action by the IAEA Board would be met with a firm response. “Iran will react strongly to any violation of its rights,” Araghchi said in a separate post on X. “The responsibility lies solely with those misusing the agency to gain political leverage.”
Tensions rising ahead of IAEA board vote
The IAEA board is expected to convene next week, with diplomats telling Reuters the United States and the so-called E3 — Britain, France, and Germany — plan to table a resolution formally declaring Iran in violation of its safeguards obligations. If adopted, it would mark the first such finding since 2005, a move that could pave the way for a referral to the UN Security Council and further sanctions.
Israel has accused Iran of being “fully committed” to obtaining nuclear weapons, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office saying “there is no civilian explanation” for Iran’s current enrichment levels.
Iran, for its part, continues to insist that its nuclear program is strictly peaceful and has dismissed the possibility of negotiating over the principle of enrichment.
No deal without enrichment, Tehran says
In comments echoed by other senior Iranian officials, Parliament National Security Committee chair Ebrahim Azizi said enrichment is a “red line.” “There can be no negotiation over the principle of enrichment,” he said. “It is a matter of national sovereignty.”
Iran also criticized Western suggestions of a fuel consortium or a temporary freeze on enrichment. “Without recognition of our right to enrichment, no agreement will be possible,” said Alaeddin Boroujerdi, another senior MP.
Snapback and retaliation threats
The mounting tension comes as Western capitals also weigh triggering the so-called snapback mechanism under the 2015 nuclear deal, which would restore UN sanctions. Iranian hardline media warned that such a move would be seen as “blackmail” and would provoke a fundamental shift in Iran’s nuclear doctrine.
The conservative daily Khorasan said Iran “could produce 10 atomic bombs” and that its missile program should not be underestimated. It warned that activating the snapback would mean “Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA has yielded nothing.”
Key to that mission, Congressman Cory Mills said, was enabling de facto president Ahmed al-Sharaa to scotch what remains of Iran's influence in Syria.
"What do we truly have to lose in this? You know, we know what we have to lose if they ... allow Iran to create a proxy state and what that means for the region and what that means for our allies," Mills said.
Syria’s new leadership is working to stamp out any Iranian activity on its soil, just months after a rebel advance led by al-Sharaa uprooted the Assad dynasty, Tehran's oldest Arab ally.
Damascus has been expelling proxy fighters, cutting off arms transfers to Hezbollah and pursuing new diplomatic partnerships across the region, including potential ties with Israel, Mills told Eye for Iran.
“He’s not allowing these proxy militias to continue to operate there as they did under the Assad regime,” Mills said.
Syria for Syrians
Mills argues this shift presents an opportunity for Washington to engage—both diplomatically and economically—before Russia, China or Iran move to fill the vacuum.
“If we actually open up the platform to allow for contract bidding, to rebuild infrastructure, that is a great first start,” he said, pointing to areas like water, electricity, and telecoms. “This is one of the most strategic geolocations in the entire region.”
Such engagement, he added, would not only counter authoritarian influence—it would create opportunities for American companies, reinforce regional stability, and help prevent Syria from sliding back into sectarian violence.
“The Iranian people could take a lot away from what has happened in Syria,” he said. “This could be them too. But it has to be an Iranian strategy, not an American strategy.”
Sanctions and Syria's new leadership
Until recently, Ahmed al-Sharaa was himself under US sanctions due to his leadership of Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), an Al-Qaeda affiliated group designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the State Department.
On May 13, 2025, President Donald Trump while visiting Saudi Arabia last month made a shock announcement that he was lifting US sanctions on Syria.
Mills stressed that engagement with al-Sharaa must come with clear-eyed realism. “Trust but verify,” he said during the interview. “I think he knows what he has to do. He’s already taken actions that are not just words.”
Diplomatic overtures and regional stability
Mills revealed that al-Sharaa expressed interest in normalizing relations with Israel—albeit cautiously. While no formal talks have begun, the signal alone marks a dramatic shift from the Assad era, which was defined by hostility toward Israel and alignment with Iran and Hezbollah.
“He actually said that we would look at a good relationship and partner with Israel—not the 'Zionist state' ... but he knows the risk that he's taking,” Mills said.
The potential for Syrian-Israeli normalization would echo the Abraham Accords, a US-brokered framework that reshaped parts of the Middle East by bringing Israel into diplomatic relations with several Arab states.
Mills said any future agreements must respect Syria’s sovereignty. “What I don’t support is a balkanization of other sovereign territories,” he said. “I think that good fences make good neighbors.”
The trip to Damascus, however, was not without danger. Mills told Eye for Iran that Islamic State had allegedly plotted to assassinate him while he was in Syria. “They had already put together where they were going to utilize a car bomb,” he said. “They had already put together the location.”
Despite the risks, Mills argued that Syria’s political realignment offers the United States a rare chance to help shape a post-war roadmap—one that sidelines Iran, opens new diplomatic channels and bolsters long-term regional stability.
You can watch the full episode of Eye for Iran with Congressman Cory Mills on YouTube or listen on any major podcast platform like Spotify, Apple, Amazon Music or Castbox.
The network—run by Iranian brothers Mansour, Nasser and Fazlolah Zarringhalam—relied on front companies in Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates to evade sanctions and move funds through a parallel financial system, the US Treasury said.
“Iran’s shadow banking system is a critical lifeline for the government through which it accesses the proceeds from its oil sales, moves money, and funds its destabilizing activities,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in the statement.
According to the Treasury, the Zarringhalam brothers used Iran-based exchange houses—GCM Exchange, Berelian Exchange and Zarrin Ghalam Exchange—alongside dozens of front companies to facilitate transactions for entities such as the National Iranian Oil Company, the Quds Force, and Iran’s Ministry of Defense.
The operations involved fictitious invoices and payments routed through jurisdictions with limited financial oversight, the department said.
State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce wrote on X that the network had “laundered billions of dollars for the Iranian government.”
“Under @POTUS’s maximum pressure campaign, we will starve Iran of the funds it uses to further its destabilizing activities.”
Friday’s sanctions were the first US measures targeting Iran’s shadow banking infrastructure since President Trump re-imposed “maximum pressure” on Tehran in February, the department said.
Last Sunday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the White House had temporarily paused new sanctions in parallel with ongoing nuclear negotiations, citing a directive from Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.
Following Treasury’s announcement, Wall Street Journal reporter Elliot Kaufman wrote on X that the sanctions-pause policy had ended after the newspaper’s coverage. “We can now confirm what we heard Monday and Tuesday: The sanctions‑pause policy has been killed after it was exposed in our WSJ editorial,” he said.
