Two-minute read
The Iranian regime has swiftly dismissed the May 8, 2025, National Council of Resistance of Iran’s (NCRI) revelation of a secret nuclear weapons facility at Ivanaki, near Semnan, calling the exposure “fabricated” and accusing the Iranian Resistance of a disinformation campaign.
“The method of this terrorist group shows that they provide fabricated reports disguised as so-called intelligence to Western services, including the U.S., to gain credibility,” Tehran’s UN Mission stated Thursday, echoing a familiar script employed after previous disclosures.
State media repeated these accusations. Jamaran reported, “Fox News, relying on satellite images provided by the terrorist group MEK, claimed the existence of a secret nuclear site in Semnan under the codename ‘Rainbow Site.’” Meanwhile, Ensaf News warned that “this report dangerously recalls August 2002, when MEK publicly unveiled Natanz and Arak,” leading to what it described as a “nuclear crisis for the Islamic Republic that has haunted Tehran for over two decades.”
Indeed, the Iranian regime’s response fits a well-established pattern. Since 1991, the NCRI and its principal component, the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), have exposed over 100 secret nuclear-related facilities. Yet only in 2002, after the Natanz revelation, did the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) initiate inspections. Each time, Tehran first issued sweeping denials, then admitted partial truths under pressure.
In light of @iaeaorg BoG resolution on the #Iranian regime's misconduct and failure to cooperate with the @UN watchdog, it's crucial to revisit over 3 decades of secretive activities and the NCRI's constant efforts to prevent a nuclear-armed pariah state.https://t.co/EiJenAsaiU https://t.co/lvD6qbumiY pic.twitter.com/qcXZLwOPO7
— NCRI-FAC (@iran_policy) June 5, 2024
Today’s dismissal arrives not in isolation, but as the latest chapter in two decades of revelations, denials, delayed admissions, and international inaction. Tehran’s reflexive rejection, rather than confidence, reveals its unease with the implications of the NCRI’s latest disclosure.
At the press conference, NCRI-US Deputy Director Alireza Jafarzadeh highlighted the critical role of PMOI sources risking their lives to gather intelligence, stressing that without their courage, the international community could face a nuclear-armed Iranian regime without warning.”
The Ivanaki site, operating under the cover of Diba Energy Sina Company, was described as highly secured, with restricted access, fencing, surveillance cameras, and IRGC oversight. Iranian media have not addressed these security features, focusing solely on attacking the source.
1/4-The JCPOA did not dissuade #Iran’s regime from pursuing a nuclear bomb. Mullahs used the resulting financial windfall fuel regional proxies, renew terror plots in Europe, develop their nuclear/ballistic missile programs & suppress Iran’s people. https://t.co/SgO8yWdEzp pic.twitter.com/VO66iN6z2p
— Mohammad Mohaddessin (@Mohaddessin) April 6, 2021
If Tehran claims the NCRI’s information is false, then surely a so-called “paint factory” would have nothing to hide from neutral international inspectors—especially if such a visit could discredit the Resistance and bolster the regime’s narrative. But why then does this site require IRGC missile defenses and a long-range radar system to protect it?
Anything short of this raises legitimate doubts, especially given the regime’s history of delaying inspections, sanitizing facilities, and staging controlled visits long after revelations surface. While it remains to be seen if Tehran will repeat this pattern, past behavior suggests the possibility cannot be dismissed.
Adding urgency, the IAEA continues to face unresolved questions from earlier inquiries, including unexplained uranium particles at undeclared sites and incomplete explanations about Iran’s nuclear archive and weaponization studies.
Two decades ago, at a session of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, I proposed a third solution to the Iran issue, stating that the international community is not compelled to choose between a nuclear-armed mullahs’ regime or war.
There is a third solution:… pic.twitter.com/mxwagPFii7— Maryam Rajavi (@Maryam_Rajavi) April 16, 2025
In this context, relying solely on Tehran’s denials—while leaving sites like Ivanaki uninspected—risks enabling the clerical dictatorship’s nuclear ambitions under the cover of obfuscation.
As Ensaf News acknowledged, Iran’s leadership has never fully recovered from the exposure of Natanz and Arak. That Tehran still blames the PMOI for initiating international scrutiny underscores the effectiveness and impact of these revelations.
If not for the NCRI’s disclosures, the Iranian regime could well have crossed the nuclear weapons threshold unchecked.
Twenty years later, the stakes are no less grave. The international community must not wait for a “smoking gun” after it’s too late. Immediate inspection of Ivanaki and other military-linked nuclear facilities—many long exposed by the NCRI yet kept off-limits—must be prioritized to prevent Tehran from achieving irreversible nuclear weapons capability.