Background and Recent Context

On September 9, 2025, Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reached a new technical agreement in Cairo that aims to restore cooperation, including restarting inspections of its nuclear facilities. The deal comes after several months of suspended collaboration, triggered by a 12-day conflict in June during which U.S. and Israeli strikes allegedly damaged Iranian nuclear infrastructure.

Earlier in 2025, Iran’s parliament passed a bill to suspend all cooperation with the IAEA, including inspections, reporting, and surveillance. The suspension was a response to what Iranian officials have described as the IAEA’s inability or unwillingness to condemn attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, which many in Tehran perceived as a breach of its obligations to protect Iranian infrastructure.

Key Provisions of the New Agreement

• The agreement is of a “technical nature,” focusing on defining practical modalities for resuming inspection activity. It does not immediately grant access to all disputed sites but establishes the framework for future inspections.
• IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi described the outcome as “an important step in the right direction,” underlining obligations under Iran’s existing safeguard agreements and the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
• Tehran maintains that any inspections beyond the currently accessible Bushehr nuclear power plant will require prior approval from Iran's Supreme National Security Council. Formal access to other sites remains subject to further negotiation.
• The deal includes provisions for Iran to report on its enriched uranium stockpile and on conditions at sites that were attacked in June. However, precise timelines and verification mechanisms remain to be fully specified.

International Reactions and Stakes

European states—particularly the UK, France, and Germany (often called the “E3”)—have expressed cautious optimism over the agreement, but emphasize that concrete implementation will be essential. These countries have also signalled that the snapback mechanism for reimposing UN sanctions could be revived if Iran’s cooperation remains incomplete.

Within Iran, hard-line parliamentary factions have questioned whether full sovereignty is being preserved and insisted that no inspections occur without strict oversight. Additionally, Iranian officials have warned that reimposed sanctions or “hostile acts” could render the agreement void.

Challenges and Uncertainties Ahead

Observers note that while the agreement represents progress, several crucial issues remain unresolved. Key among them are:

1. Verification and transparency: Without clear timelines and unambiguous access to all affected sites, trust may remain limited.
2. Legal and political constraints: Iran’s requirement that its Supreme National Security Council approve site access could introduce delays or limit the IAEA’s reach.
3. Sanctions pressure: The looming “snapback” process for sanctions by Western powers raises the cost of non-compliance for Tehran. This makes timely action critical.
4. Damage Assessment: Some nuclear facilities were damaged during the June strikes; the extent, remediation needed, and the status of nuclear material at those sites remain uncertain.

Implications for Nuclear Diplomacy and Non-Proliferation

If fully implemented, the new framework could help restore trust between Iran and the wider international community, particularly in relation to its nuclear obligations under the NPT. It may also provide breathing room for diplomatic initiatives aimed at preventing further escalation in the region.

Conversely, delays or partial compliance could reopen old tensions and make sanctions reinstatement inevitable, potentially destabilizing existing agreements and undermining non-proliferation norms.

Looking Ahead

The next few weeks and months are expected to be decisive. Key benchmarks include Iran’s provision of technical reports on its enriched uranium stockpile and attacked sites, the granting (or denial) of inspector access beyond Bushehr, and whether sanctions threats translate into diplomatic leverage. Monitoring by independent institutions and international media will also be important in holding all sides to their commitments.

Overall, this evolving agreement between Iran and the IAEA could mark a turning point, provided the terms are honored in good faith and with adequate transparency. Otherwise, it may prove to be a fragile truce rather than a durable resolution.