Why Nuclear Infrastructure Protection Matters More Than Ever
As geopolitical tensions continue to evolve across the Middle East, concerns surrounding nuclear infrastructure security and radiological risk are becoming increasingly important for governments, defence organisations and critical infrastructure operators worldwide. Recent developments involving Iranian nuclear sites have reinforced a core point for the international security community, attacks on nuclear-related facilities can sharply degrade nuclear safety and security, even where there is no immediate off-site radiological impact on the public.
While diplomacy must remain the priority, recent events underline the need for preparedness, resilience and technically reliable monitoring. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has repeatedly warned that armed attacks on nuclear facilities should never take place because of the risk of radioactive release with grave consequences within and beyond the state attacked, while the World Health Organization (WHO) notes that radiation emergencies can arise in military conflicts and can affect human life, health, property and the environment.
For the global security community, the focus is on preparedness, resilience, radiation detection and emergency response is becoming increasingly proliferated.
Radiological vs Nuclear Risk – Understanding the Difference
Although the terms are often used interchangeably in public debate, radiological and nuclear (R&N) emergencies are not the same. WHO distinguishes nuclear emergencies as those involving the release of energy from a nuclear chain reaction or its products, while radiological emergencies involve exposure to, or release from, radioactive sources more broadly. Radiation emergencies may result from industrial, medical or research sources, transport incidents, malicious acts or military conflict.
That distinction matters because not every attack on a nuclear-related site leads to a large off-site release. In June 2025, the IAEA reported localised radiological and chemical contamination inside affected Iranian facilities, while also stating that there had been no reported increase in off-site radiation levels and no radiological impact to neighbouring countries based on the data available at the time. This is an important reminder that risk is highly site-specific and depends on the materials present, the damage pathway and whether critical containment or safety systems are compromised.
The Risks Associated with Nuclear Facilities During Conflict
Nuclear facilities are built with extensive safety measures and layered security systems. However, armed conflict introduces a different category of risk including damage to electrical infrastructure, disruption to cooling or ventilation systems, pressure on staffing, degraded communications and reduced access for technical oversight. The IAEA’s reporting on both Ukraine and Iran shows how quickly conflict can compromise the conditions needed for safe and secure operation.
In Iran’s case, the IAEA reported damage in June 2025 to facilities associated with enrichment, uranium conversion, fuel manufacturing and centrifuge component production, while stressing that attacks had caused a sharp degradation in nuclear safety and security. At the same time, the Agency drew a clear distinction between facilities that contained nuclear material and those that did not, noting for example that no radiological consequence was expected at the Khondab Heavy Water Research Reactor under construction because it was not operational and contained no nuclear material.
This differentiation is important for operators and policymakers because operational power reactors, enrichment facilities, conversion plants, spent fuel and waste-related installations, research reactors and associated support systems all carry different hazard profiles. The consequences of an incident depend not only on the target struck, but also on whether off-site power is maintained, whether emergency systems remain functional and whether skilled personnel can continue to operate safely and communicate reliably.
What International Best Practice Says Must Be Protected
One useful way to frame this challenge is through the IAEA’s “Seven Indispensable Pillars” for nuclear safety and security during armed conflict. In its reporting on Ukraine, the Agency highlighted the need to maintain the physical integrity of facilities, the operation of safety and security systems, acceptable working conditions for personnel, secure supply chains and logistics, communications, radiation monitoring and emergency arrangements, and reliable off-site power. These are not abstract principles; they are the operational foundations of nuclear resilience in crisis situations.
The relevance of that framework extends well beyond Ukraine. Any environment in which facilities may be exposed to kinetic attack, cyber disruption or prolonged operational instability should be assessed against the same fundamentals. The key question to ask is ‘can the site remain powered, monitored, staffed, secured and connected, and can emergency decisions be made quickly based on trusted data?
Lessons from Previous Nuclear Incidents
The international community has already witnessed the long-term impact of nuclear accidents and radiological contamination. One of the defining characteristics of radiological incidents is that their effects rarely remain contained within national borders. This is because air currents, water systems and global trade routes can all contribute to the spread of contamination.
The Chernobyl nuclear disaster in 1986 in Soviet Ukraine demonstrated how radioactive fallout can spread across borders, contaminate agricultural land and create public health challenges that persist for decades. Kromek’s CEO, Dr Arnab Basu, recently spoke with LBC about the 40th anniversary of Chernobyl and how 40 years on, the environment is still seeing the consequences of such a catastrophic event.
Similarly, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster in 2011 in Japan, highlighted the importance of resilient cooling systems, emergency preparedness and rapid response capabilities. 15 years on and while the radiation levels in most surrounding communities have fallen, and despite many evacuation orders having been lifted, the population of residential areas remains far below pre-2011 levels. Full decommissioning of the site is expected to take several more decades to complete.
Both incidents continue to shape international nuclear safety standards and radiological emergency planning worldwide. Preventative action must be prioritised. Decision-makers both on and offsite of an incident must be equipped with actionable intelligence to coordinate rapid, context-specific action. To achieve this, the approach must be holistic, with the R&N incident detected, identified and mapped using concrete data from reliable technology. Prepared responses can then be set in motion e.g., deploying suitably equipped, trained responders with modern PPE.
Unlike other CBRN threats, R&N threats are more predictable, allowing different scenarios to be prepared for in advance. Decision-makers just need the right information to know what responses to implement quickly where and when. With a widespread and technically capable early warning system, essential spectral data is aggregated onto a single platform from each deployed static, mobile or handheld detector. Responses on different scales can then be coordinated in the appropriate location and timeframe.
Environmental Impact
Radiological contamination can have profound and lasting environmental consequences, affecting ecosystems, infrastructure, and human livelihoods across both the short and long term. Understanding these impacts is critical for effective risk mitigation, environmental monitoring, and emergency response planning.
One of the most immediate consequences of radiological contamination is its effect on agricultural land. Radioactive particles can settle on soil, crops, and grazing land, leading to contamination of the food chain. Crops may absorb radionuclides, making them unsafe for consumption and leading to long-term restrictions on land use. Livestock exposed to contaminated feed or water can also become a vector for radiological spread. These effects can persist for years or even decades, significantly impacting food security and local economies.
Radiological contamination in coastal or marine environments can disrupt delicate ecosystems and threaten fisheries. Radioactive materials entering the ocean may be absorbed by plankton, fish, and other marine organisms, bioaccumulating up the food chain. This not only affects biodiversity but also poses serious risks to human consumers. Fishing industries may face prolonged closures, and public confidence in seafood safety can take years to recover.
Furthermore, safe drinking water is essential for human health, yet it is particularly vulnerable to contamination from radiological incidents. Groundwater sources, rivers, and reservoirs can all become compromised. In severe cases, communities may lose access to potable water entirely, requiring costly remediation measures or alternative supply solutions. Continuous monitoring and rapid detection technologies are critical in preventing widespread health impacts.
Not only does radiological contamination affect human systems, it also disrupts wildlife and natural habitats. Exposure can cause genetic mutations, reproductive issues, and population declines across a range of species. Sensitive ecosystems may take decades to recover, and in some cases, permanent ecological shifts can occur. The loss of biodiversity further destabilises ecosystems, reducing resilience to future environmental stresses.
Early detection and continuous monitoring are essential in mitigating environmental damage. Advanced radiation detection technologies enable rapid identification of contamination, helping to inform timely response strategies and minimise long-term impact. Solutions that provide accurate, real-time data are critical for protecting ecosystems, infrastructure, and public health.
Any radiological release introduces serious public health concerns. Emergency response agencies must be prepared to manage a multitude of events from civilian evacuation and radiation exposure monitoring to medical screening, long-term health surveillance, and public communication and reassurance.
Even relatively low levels of contamination can generate significant public anxiety and social disruption.
The Importance of Modern Radiation Detection Technologies
In high-risk environments, speed, accuracy and situational awareness are critical.
Modern radiation detection systems are increasingly relied upon to support frontline personnel, protect critical infrastructure and improve emergency response capabilities.
Advanced radiological detection technologies can help support:
- Border security and customs screening
- Maritime and port security
- Military and defence operations
- Urban monitoring
- Transportation infrastructure protection
- Nuclear incident response
- Critical infrastructure resilience
The ability to rapidly detect, identify and assess radioactive threats allows organisations to respond faster, reduce uncertainty and protect both civilians and frontline personnel.
Real-Time Detection and Isotope Identification
Real-time radiation detection and isotope identification are also becoming increasingly important for security and emergency response teams.
Advanced systems can help operators detect radioactive materials quickly, differentiate between benign and dangerous sources, assess contamination risks, support evacuation planning, and improve operational decision-making.
As geopolitical risks continue to evolve, demand for portable, accurate and highly sensitive radiation detection technologies is expected to grow.
International Cooperation Remains Essential
No single nation can address radiological and nuclear security challenges alone, particularly where consequences may cross borders or overwhelm local systems. International collaboration between governments, regulators, scientific organisations and industry remains critical to strengthening preparedness and reducing risk.
Organisations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) continue to play an important role in promoting nuclear safety standards, emergency preparedness and international cooperation.
Key areas of focus include, nuclear safety and security standards, cross-border emergency response coordination, radiation detection technology deployment, information sharing and intelligence collaboration, training and capacity building, and critical infrastructure resilience.
International Cooperation Remains Essential
For national authorities, critical infrastructure operators and security teams, maintaining the ability to detect, identify, map and communicate radiological conditions quickly is essential.
Fixed, mobile and handheld detection systems, reliable data integration, and timely sharing of information across operational teams can all support faster, better-informed decisions in high-pressure situations. This is where modern radiation detection technologies become especially valuable, not only after a release is confirmed, but during the uncertainty phase when decisions still must be made.
The IAEA’s emergency framework enables states to request assistance, coordinate expertise and deploy specialist capabilities through the Response and Assistance Network (RANET), while WHO has a formal role in public-health advice and medical preparedness under the international emergency architecture.
This makes cross-border notification, trusted technical information and interoperable response planning indispensable. Radiation emergencies demand coordination between regulators, operators, health systems, emergency responders, border agencies and international organisations. When tensions rise, that coordination becomes even more important.
Looking Ahead
The recent focus on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure is a broader reminder that nuclear safety, nuclear security and radiological preparedness cannot be separated from wider geopolitical risk. The June 2025 attacks demonstrated that facilities can suffer serious degradation in safety and security even when there is no immediate off-site radiological release, and they reinforced the need for sustained monitoring, credible verification and rapid technical assessment.
Preventing nuclear-related crises through diplomacy and international cooperation must remain the priority. But preparedness also matters. Organisations responsible for national resilience, critical infrastructure protection and frontline response need access to accurate, timely radiological intelligence to support effective decision-making under pressure. At Kromek, we develop advanced radiation detection and monitoring solutions designed to help deliver that insight in complex environments, supporting those tasked with protecting people, assets and ecosystems when clarity matters most.
To learn more about Kromek’s radiation detection capabilities, explore our solutions or contact our team.
Or to learn more about advanced radiation detection technologies and nuclear security capabilities, explore our solutions.
Sources:
Frequently Asked Questions
What happens if a nuclear facility is attacked?
Damage to nuclear infrastructure can result in radioactive contamination, disruption to critical systems and potential civilian exposure. The severity depends on the type of facility involved and the extent of the damage.
Can radiation spread across borders?
Yes, radioactive particles can travel through air currents and water systems, potentially affecting neighbouring countries, agriculture and water supplies.
Which nuclear facilities pose the greatest risk during conflict?
Operational nuclear power plants typically present the highest risk because they contain large quantities of nuclear fuel and spent radioactive material.
How do radiation detection systems help during emergencies?
Radiation detection systems enable responders to identify radioactive threats, assess contamination levels and improve situational awareness during incidents.
