What is Iran's secretive Fordow site?
Iran's secretive Fordow nuclear site, hidden in a mountain south of the country's capital, has become a focal point in the escalating Israel-Iran conflict, as the U.S. weighs stepping in to help Israel topple Tehran's nuclear capabilities.
The Fordow site, formally known in the international community as the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant and in Iran as the Shahid Ali Mohammadi Nuclear Facility, is located under more than 300 feet of rock, necessitating the use of heavy weaponry to strike it.
The U.S. has the capability to deploy massive bombs known as bunker busters to hit the facility, but Israel does not.
The United Nations's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) last verified Fordow's enrichment capabilities on May 28, according to its most recent report on Iran's nuclear activities.
An analysis from the independent Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists based on the IAEA report concluded that Iran has enough centrifuges and uranium hexafluoride gas at the site to produce several nuclear weapons.
'They could probably produce enough weapon-grade (90 percent) enriched uranium for one nuclear weapon within five to six days,' the Bulletin reported.
The Bulletin's analysis noted that Fordow's underground location means 'it could — in theory — continue to operate even after other nuclear facilities in the country have been destroyed, with its material then fueling nuclear weapons to be produced clandestinely.'
'Fordow is, therefore, a crucially important place if one attempts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons,' the Bulletin's analyst wrote. 'If Israel decides to continue down the military path against Iran's nuclear program, it has no choice but to ensure that the Fordow enrichment plant no longer poses a threat.'
Then-President Obama publicly revealed the existence of the Fordow facility in September 2009.
'It was designed and built over the past several years in direct violation of resolutions from the Security Council and from the IAEA,' Obama said at the time, noting that 'the size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program.'
Iran had disclosed its above-ground Natanz enrichment site, but Fordow's existence was a secret.
'Iran's decision to build yet another nuclear facility without notifying the IAEA represents a direct challenge to the basic compact at the center of the non-proliferation regime,' Obama said.
The IAEA was granted daily access upon request to monitor the Fordow enrichment facility under the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), but President Trump upended the Iran nuclear deal in 2018 during his first administration and Tehran gradually moved away from allowing strict international oversight.
Iran removed all of the agency's surveillance and monitoring equipment at Fordow in 2022.
Trump's second administration was attempting to hash out a new nuclear agreement with Iran that would prevent it from developing a weapon, but Israel's surprise strikes against Iran last week stopped the ongoing negotiations.
Experts also question what Iran would do if Fordow isn't demolished.
'A deal could be constructed that would permit inspectors of the IAEA access to the site, just as was the case until June 13. But Israel's attack has most probably changed Iranian strategic calculus fundamentally,' the Bulletin's analyst wrote.
'Even if there were to be a deal in which Fordow remained in existence as a uranium enrichment site, the risk of an Iranian breakout scenario to produce nuclear weapons is probably greater today than it was a week ago: Iran has been shown that its conventional military cannot deter an Israeli attack, and therefore it is far likelier to have difficulty restocking its missile and other military forces (especially air defense) than Israel will.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
35 minutes ago
- Fox News
Israel-Iran conflict enters week two as international community pushes for resolution
incoming update… The Israel Defense Forces said it killed a commander of the Quds Force's Weapons Transfer Unit in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards in a strike in western Iran. Behnam Shahriyari "was responsible for all weapons transfers from the Iranian regime to its proxies across the Middle East in order to directly advance the Iranian regime's plan to destroy Israel," the IDF said. "Shahriyari also commanded the transfer of hundreds of millions of dollars annually to various terrorist organizations," it continued. "Furthermore, he led the extensive effort to finance and arm these terrorist organizations—an effort that has resulted in the deaths and injuries of many Israeli civilians and soldiers." He was killed while traveling in western Iran, the IDF said. "His elimination represents a severe blow to the ability of the terrorist organizations surrounding Israel to regroup and strengthen after being heavily damaged by the IDF during the war," the IDF said. On Saturday, the State of Israel's official X account posted a video tour of a mosque in Haifa that suffered severe damage in an Iranian missile. Amro Hossein, the muezzin of Al-Jarina Mosque, walks through the damage and condemned Iran's actions. "When [Iran] shot the missile they don't [see a] difference. They don't ask you if you are Muslim, if you are Jewish, if you are Christian, if you are anything," Hossein said. "They attack everyone in this country just for one thing: to smash this country." Hossein also expressed his faith in Israel's ability to defend itself and to "smash every enemy." The head of the Palestinian Division in the Quds Force from the Iranian Revolutionary Guards was killed in an Israeli strike in the Iranian city of Qom, according to the Israeli Defense Forces. The IDF said Saeed Izadi was also a "key coordinator between the Iranian regime and Hamas, and one of the main orchestrators of the October 7 massacre." "He was responsible for military coordination between the senior commanders of the IRGC and the Iranian regime with key figures in Hamas," it said. "As part of his role, Izadi was responsible for increasing the financial funding from Iran to Hamas for terrorist activities against Israel," the IDF said. "During the war, he was also responsible for directing Hamas forces operating from Lebanon. Since then, he has been committed to rebuilding Hamas' military wing and ensuring that Hamas remains the controlling authority in Gaza." Chinese President Xi Jinping recently made a proposal on the ongoing conflict between Israel and Iran, which was detailed by Fu Cong, China's permanent representative to the U.N. The proposal includes the position that promoting a ceasefire and ending hostilities is an urgent priority, the stance that ensuring the safety of civilians is of the utmost importance, stressing that opening dialogue and negotiation is the "fundamental way forward" and ensuring that efforts by the international community to promote peace are "indispensable." Cong reiterated Xi's proposal at Friday's Security Council meeting called by China, Pakistan and Russia. The U.S. Embassy in Iraq is urging Americans not to travel to Iraq and avoid large gatherings if they must be in the country after US interests in Iraq have been targeted by Iran. The U.S. State Department maintains a level four "do not travel" advisory for Iraq, saying that Americans should not travel to the country for any reason. The embassy advises Americans who must travel to Iraq to avoid large gatherings and crowds, keep their phone charged and update their loved ones of their status as well as enrolling in the Smart Traveler Enrollment Program to receive information and alerts and make it easier to locate them in an emergency overseas. Americans were also encouraged to prepare a plan for emergencies. Live Coverage begins here
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Israel resumes limited natural gas exports amid ongoing conflict
Israel has recommenced limited natural gas exports, prioritising domestic needs, according to the country's Energy Ministry. This move comes nearly one week after the shutdown of two significant offshore fields due to military activities in the region. The Ministry Spokesperson conveyed to Reuters that the resumed exports are derived from surplus supplies. While most of the limited exported gas is currently flowing to Jordan, only "tiny volumes" have reached Egypt this week, as per an Energy Ministry source. The halt in exports began on 13 June following military escalation, leading to the closure of the Leviathan and Karish fields, operated by Chevron and Energean, respectively. During this period, only the Tamar field remained operational, catering mainly to Israel's domestic demand. Israeli Energy Minister Eli Cohen stated that exports would only resume once military authorities deemed it safe. He told Reuters: 'I don't want to use our strategic storage, so therefore, I needed to cut exports.' Egyptian fertilizer producers, impacted by the supply disruption, have not yet received gas but are expecting flows to resume next week. Israeli gas is a crucial component of Egypt's energy mix, representing up to 60% of its gas imports and around a fifth of its total consumption, as reported by the Joint Organizations Data Initiative (JODI). Egypt has been hard-pressed to find alternatives to gas from Israel, which has become a significant importer due to a decline in domestic production in 2022. To bridge the supply gap, Egypt has increased fuel oil usage in power plants and secured deals to import more than $8bn (E£405.35bn) worth of liquefied natural gas. The country is also preparing additional floating regasification units. The Egyptian Petroleum Ministry has not provided comment on the matter. "Israel resumes limited natural gas exports amid ongoing conflict" was originally created and published by Offshore Technology, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
What the world is getting wrong on Israel: An interview with Natasha Hausdorff
Natasha Hausdorff, the British barrister who has become an outspoken defender of Israel's legal rights on global news networks, warns that a 'vicious cycle of disinformation' — fuelled by media self-censorship and terrorist propaganda — has warped the world's understanding of the Gaza conflict, and put Jewish lives at risk. More notably, the expert in international law has popularized one such law, Uti possidetis juris. It states that newly formed sovereign countries should retain the borders that their preceding area had before their independence. Therefore, at the time Israel declared itself a state, Mandatory Palestine – which included what today is known as Israel, Judea and Samaria (a.k.a. the West Bank) and Gaza – would by law be legal territorial boundaries of Israel. It is a lynchpin argument, she believes, against the charges of 'illegal occupation' and 'illegal settlements.' She regularly briefs politicians and international organizations and has spoken at parliaments across Europe. After her law degree at Oxford University, she clerked for the president of the Supreme Court of Israel in Jerusalem in 2016. In 2018, Hausdorff was a Fellow at Columbia Law School in the National Security Law Program. Dave Gordon interviewed Hausdorff prior to a talk she delivered at Toronto's Nova Exhibition on June 12, hosted by StandWithUs Canada. It would seem ought to have been used by Israel decades ago in international forums. Why hasn't it? I can fully appreciate that Israel's official stance is constrained by diplomatic operations and political pressures. It's a rule that applies automatically, whatever Israel says about the situation. There are other examples of Israel not standing on ceremony, as far as international law is concerned. One of those relates to Egypt's obligation to open the border to Palestinian civilians, fleeing civil disorder in Gaza. That's in accordance with Egypt's obligation under the Organization of African Unity Convention on (governing the specific aspect of) Refugees, which it signed in 1980. This is a convention that has a much broader definition of refugee than the international convention. Nobody has been calling on Egypt to open the border from October 2023. But Israel can't pressure (that), because Egypt threatened to tear up the peace agreement with Israel. What's your opinion about how the media's been covering the war? If the BBC were reporting from North Korea, there would be some indication somewhere that we are not free to report without censorship — controlled in what we're able to say by the regime. I have not seen a single piece of reporting from Gaza that has acknowledged that: nothing comes out of the Gaza Strip that is not controlled by Hamas. So for a start, the notion that the international media would be parroting Hamas propaganda in this fashion is deeply shameful, and indicates to me a complete absence of journalistic integrity. That's quite apart from the devastating impact that this is having. When I talk to policy makers, officials around the world, they tell me they're basing their determination on what to do, on the basis of the Gaza pictures they see in the media. Now, let me be clear, they are terrible. But I see on Israeli media, a series of interviews from Channel 12 in November, in Gaza, where they held out a microphone to Palestinians that were leaving Jabala. At the time, they could not grab it from him quickly enough, to tell the world how Hamas was responsible for all of the ills that had been visited upon them, how grateful they were to Israel for the humanitarian assistance, the fact that Israel provided humanitarian corridors. I didn't see those interviews anywhere on the international broadcast media. Frankly, they don't fit with the agenda that people want to follow. The amount of damage that this self-censorship, and embracing of Hamas, and other terrorist organization propaganda is doing, is seen in the obscene statements that we've heard from supposed allies of Israel: the U.K., France and Canada. Jews are being executed on the streets in the capital of the free world (Washington, D.C.), and I think that is directly attributable to the irresponsible broadcast, where we had the media repeating this absurd claim of 14,000 babies dying in the next 48 hours. The link, I'm afraid, is undeniable. Do you think Israel is telling its story well? So much misreporting is happening, and this isn't being addressed. Can I put the blame squarely on Israel? I struggle with that, because the fact of the matter is that a lot of this information is publicly available. Right? The Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) website catalogues all of the aid going into Gaza, over the last 19 months. That is not only ignored by the international media, by politicians, by the UN, by the ICJ, it is actually inverted. And there is this reoccurring canard that there's not enough food getting into Gaza, which, ultimately, you know, Israel can't really fix if it's telling people what the reality is, and they choose to ignore it. That's not necessarily on Israel's head. Have Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran, gotten better at the propaganda war? They certainly have, I think, invested a great deal more in time, energy and resources into it. It's certainly been a key factor of Hamas's planning of this war. Hamas puts members in press vests, and generates fake images. We're seeing the impact of that disinformation campaign. I think we need to understand the symbiotic relationship that exists with these terrorist organizations and international organizations. The Amnesty International report on genocide makes it clear in their methodology that they are taking their information from Hamas. They call them 'local government authorities,' but we all know what they're talking about. They take this terrorist propaganda, put it into a report, which is headed up by Amnesty International. Then that gets repeated by Special Rapporteurs at the UN, like Francesca Albanese. Then it gets worked into UN resolutions, and the Human Rights Council or the General Assembly, then it gets quoted by the ICJ or the ICC, and then these international organizations pick it up again and say, 'see! The ICJ says so.' So that vicious cycle of disinformation has been operational for a very long time. Of the untruths peddled, like settler colonialism, genocide, apartheid, etc., which is the biggest? I think they're all deeply vicious and poisonous, and the connection that they share is they are reminiscent of the ancient blood libel against Jews. We're seeing a phenomenon where the real victims in each of these instances are being blamed for the very crimes that were committed against them. If you're asking me to pick one, I'd go with genocide, because it is the most reprehensible. Principally, when you consider that the term genocide was coined by Raphael Lemkin to provide a lexicon for the Jewish experience in the Holocaust. Ultimately the acts of the seventh of October were acts of genocide by Hamas and other Palestinian terrorists, and even Palestinian civilians targeting Jews. The fact that the experience would be weaponized against the Jews in this fashion, and they would be accused of this, is projection. It's clear to me that when South Africa brought this claim of genocide at the International Court of Justice, it didn't have much hope of getting (a win) on it. It was trying to shift the debate and shift the Overton window. In fact, when I was on (a broadcast) immediately after, my counterpart in this debate said, 'Isn't it wonderful, now we can finally use Israel and genocide in the same sentence, and nobody can tell us otherwise?' They've clearly been successful in doing that, even though the case has absolutely no resemblance to reality. The Canadian government recently sanctioned two Israeli Knesset members, and in the same statement saying that Judea and Samaria are 'illegally occupied.' What's your response? There is no illegal occupation to speak of, so (Prime Minister Mark) Carney's wrong about that. It's a policy that, as far as I can see, isn't driven by legal analysis, but by political agenda. There are demographic issues here, and riding issues of constituencies, and who it is that he needs to kowtow to, that these policies are being put in place. As a lawyer, we look for the proper and equal application of international law. You cannot have a general rule like uti possidetis juris, then an exception for a country you don't like very much, where you have some ideological or political opposition to it. That's not how any respectable legal system can operate. Mark Carney and his government are actually undermining the very notion of international rule of law, and the international legal system, by inverting it. Special to the National Post This interview has been edited for brevity. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our newsletters here.
