Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has claimed that several bombs used during US airstrikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June 2025 failed to detonate and remain lodged within the targeted sites, posing what he described as a grave safety and security threat to inspectors. The statement has added a new layer of complexity to already strained discussions over inspections, nuclear oversight, and regional security.
Speaking about the aftermath of the attacks, Araghchi said that unexploded ordnance is still present inside Iran’s nuclear facilities, creating an environment too dangerous for inspection teams. He stressed that without clear agreements on safety, security, and access protocols, Iran cannot allow inspectors to enter these locations. According to Iranian officials, the risk is not theoretical but immediate, given the nature and scale of the weapons allegedly used.
Disputed Attacks on Key Nuclear Facilities
The United States carried out airstrikes last year on three of Iran’s most sensitive nuclear installations, including facilities located at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. These sites are widely regarded as central to Iran’s uranium enrichment and nuclear technology programs and have long been at the heart of international concern and diplomatic negotiations.
Iran has repeatedly condemned the attacks as violations of international law, while Washington has maintained that the strikes were aimed at preventing further advancement of Iran’s nuclear capabilities. The latest remarks by Iran’s foreign minister suggest that the physical consequences of those strikes are still unfolding, particularly in terms of unexploded munitions embedded within critical infrastructure.
Use of Heavy Bunker-Buster Bombs
According to Iranian and regional sources, the attacks involved the US Air Force’s B-2 strategic bomber aircraft, which reportedly dropped GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs on hardened targets. Each of these weapons weighs approximately 13,600 kilograms and is specifically designed to penetrate deep layers of rock and reinforced concrete before detonating.
In addition to these bunker-buster bombs, Tomahawk cruise missiles were also launched at targets associated with Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. The combination of air-delivered penetrator bombs and long-range missiles marked one of the most significant direct military actions against Iran’s nuclear facilities in recent history.
Defense experts note that while such weapons are engineered for maximum penetration and destruction, failures to detonate can occur due to a range of factors, including geological conditions, structural density, or technical malfunctions.
Inspection Freeze and Safety Concerns
Iran has made it clear that inspections of the affected facilities will not be possible until comprehensive safety, security, and access arrangements are agreed upon. Iranian officials argue that allowing inspectors into areas containing unexploded bombs would be irresponsible and could lead to loss of life.
This position complicates the already fragile framework governing international oversight of Iran’s nuclear program. Inspection regimes are a key component of confidence-building measures between Iran and the international community, and any prolonged suspension is likely to raise concerns among Western governments and nuclear watchdogs.
Potential Intelligence Implications
Analysts have also pointed to another sensitive dimension of Araghchi’s remarks. If the unexploded ordnance includes GBU-57 bombs and Iran is able to safely recover and neutralize them, it could gain rare insight into one of the most advanced bunker-busting weapons in the US arsenal.
Experts suggest that technical examination could reveal details about the bomb’s casing thickness, the composition of the metals used, and the engineering features that allow it to penetrate deep underground without breaking apart. Such information is typically among the most closely guarded military secrets.
If the internal systems of the bomb remain intact, analysts say Iran could also study its electronic components, power systems, and navigation sensors. This could potentially provide valuable data on guidance technology and weapon design, an outcome that would be deeply concerning for US defense planners.
Regional and International Reactions
While Washington has not publicly responded in detail to Araghchi’s latest claims, the comments are likely to intensify debate within diplomatic and security circles. Regional observers fear that the presence of unexploded bombs at nuclear sites increases the risk of accidental detonations, environmental contamination, or escalation if further military action occurs.
At the same time, the issue places international inspection bodies in a difficult position, balancing safety concerns with the need for transparency and verification.
Uncertain Path Forward
As tensions persist, the situation underscores the long-term consequences of military strikes on sensitive nuclear infrastructure. Iran’s insistence on new protocols before inspections can resume suggests that a return to normal oversight will require extensive technical coordination and political negotiation.
With safety risks unresolved and trust already in short supply, the future of inspections at Iran’s nuclear facilities remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that the legacy of the June 2025 attacks continues to shape the regional security landscape and the global debate over Iran’s nuclear program.
Post a Comment