Iran’s president welcomed Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein to Tehran for an official visit, during which talks centered on regional stability, bilateral cooperation, and the highly charged issue of nuclear technology sharing between the two states. The meeting, widely reported by Iranian state media and corroborated by regional diplomatic sources, took place against a backdrop of escalating tensions over Iran’s nuclear ambitions and its deepening influence in neighboring Iraq.
During discussions, the Iranian leader publicly expressed Iran’s readiness to provide Iraq with expertise and support in the field of civilian nuclear technology, positioning the offer as an opportunity for scientific collaboration in medicine, energy, and agriculture. This announcement arrives at a sensitive time for the region, where concerns about nuclear proliferation and the risk of escalating arms races remain acute. The Iranian regime insisted, as it has in prior international forums and negotiations, that it seeks no nuclear weapons and is prepared to reach an agreement with the United States if Washington’s sole objective is to preclude Iran from obtaining them. However, this pledge comes as Western intelligence agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) continue raising concerns about undisclosed Iranian nuclear activities and insufficient transparency over its enrichment programs—issues that have soured diplomatic efforts to restore or extend the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
Iraq’s role as a regional partner is complicated by the legacy of past nuclear ambitions—most notably Saddam Hussein’s secret weapons program, dismantled following the 1981 Israeli strike on the Osirak reactor—and by the ongoing influence of Iranian-backed militias and political factions within its borders. Analysts at the Washington Institute and the Carnegie Middle East Center note that Baghdad’s balancing act between Tehran’s influence and its strategic ties to the U.S.-led coalition introduces significant risks with moves toward nuclear cooperation. Western governments, particularly those of Israel and the United States, continue to warn that any transfer of nuclear knowledge, technology, or infrastructure in Iraq must be subject to rigorous oversight to prevent diversion for military use or exploitation by terrorist groups, including those aligned with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and other elements of Iran’s so-called ‘Axis of Resistance.’
The Iranian president’s offer is in line with broader efforts by Tehran to project itself as a regional leader in science and technology, despite ongoing economic instability, internal dissent, and human rights concerns. Official Iranian statements from the government’s press agency, echoed this week by anonymous sources at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, suggest the regime is eager to counter negative international perceptions and break out of diplomatic isolation through scientific outreach. However, frequent reports by Western and regional media, as well as statements from defense officials in Israel, express persistent skepticism regarding Iran’s intentions, especially given its record of noncompliance with IAEA protocols and its involvement in supplying advanced weapons and training to proxy forces across Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and Gaza.
For observers in Israel, which perceives a direct existential threat from any Iranian advances toward a military nuclear capability, the overture to Iraq is seen as part of a multi-pronged strategy to build regional resilience against outside pressure and dilute Western resolve. Israeli military and intelligence briefings point to the risks of even outwardly civilian nuclear cooperation in fragile or compromised states, particularly where Iranian-backed groups hold sway. The possibility of technology or materials being diverted to hostile actors cannot be discounted, according to assessments by security officials published in major outlets, and precedents such as the destruction of Syria’s covert nuclear reactor in 2007 underpin a policy of vigilance and, if necessary, preemptive action.
For Baghdad, the opportunity to acquire advanced nuclear technologies ostensibly for peaceful use comes with both potential benefits and serious risks. UN experts and independent Iraqi analysts caution that the legacy of past abuses, combined with current instability, necessitates strong transparency provisions and close coordination with IAEA inspectors. They also highlight the internal political dynamics at play, as various Iraqi factions differ in their attitudes toward Tehran, and as persistent violence and the threat of reprisal from pro-Iranian militias constrain the central government’s maneuverability. Policymakers in Washington and Brussels, as indicated in recent policy briefings, have emphasized their expectations that all such cooperation remain within the bounds of international law and be reinforced by third-party oversight mechanisms to ensure full compliance with nonproliferation obligations.
The Iranian president’s rhetoric sought to frame the visit as a moment of regional solidarity and scientific progress, distancing the regime from the proliferation anxieties voiced by the West and Israel. However, the weight of evidence, as captured in official IAEA communications and ongoing diplomatic efforts to revive nuclear talks, suggests that skepticism is both warranted and necessary. The Iranian regime’s proven willingness to challenge the international order—whether through clandestine research, proxy conflicts, or the pursuit of ballistic missile capabilities—demands careful scrutiny of all nuclear-related initiatives, particularly those involving vulnerable neighboring countries.
At the same time, the broader context cannot be ignored. The Middle East remains one of the world’s most volatile regions, where ideological, ethnic, and strategic rivalries intersect with the ambitions of non-state actors and state-sponsored terrorist organizations. Western governments have repeatedly warned that an Iranian or Iranian-linked nuclear capability—be it actual or latent—could reshape the regional balance of power, embolden proxy violence against Israel and moderate Arab states, and ultimately increase the risk to global security. These warnings are underscored by recent attacks in Syria, Iraq, and Israel’s northern and southern borders by forces backed or supplied by Tehran, as documented in military communiqués and confirmed by major international news agencies.
As Iran courts Iraq with promises of peaceful nuclear cooperation, the burden of proof remains squarely on the Iranian regime to demonstrate the transparency, legality, and exclusively civilian purpose of its activities. Western countries, Israel, and international monitoring agencies will continue to monitor any resulting agreements with caution, demanding strict adherence to international norms and explicit, verifiable guarantees against proliferation. The stakes could hardly be higher: left unchecked, an erosion of the international nonproliferation regime risks emboldening terror groups, destabilizing regional governments, and undermining the prospects for lasting security and peace across the Middle East.
