Fact check: Did Iran refuse IAEA checks in biden's term

1. Summary of the results

Based on the analyses provided, Iran has indeed refused or significantly limited IAEA inspections during Biden's presidency, though the evidence shows a pattern of non-compliance that extends beyond his term.

The most recent evidence confirms that Iran is not complying with its nuclear non-proliferation obligations, with the IAEA unable to determine whether Iran's nuclear program is exclusively peaceful ^[1]. Iran has taken several specific actions that constitute refusal of IAEA checks:

• Iran rejected experienced IAEA inspectors in an unprecedented move that contradicts cooperation requirements for comprehensive safeguards agreements ^[2]
• Iran limited IAEA inspections and stopped the agency from accessing camera footage ^[3]
• Iran stopped implementing the Additional Protocol, which limits IAEA's access to certain information ^[4]
• Iran announced it would no longer cooperate with the IAEA as before and would take measures to protect nuclear materials and equipment without reporting to the IAEA ^[5]

The IAEA has censured Iran for failing to comply with nonproliferation obligations, noting that Iran's many failures to uphold its obligations since 2019 constitute non-compliance ^[6].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question lacks important temporal and geopolitical context:

• The non-compliance pattern began in 2019, predating Biden's presidency, which started in January 2021 ^[6]
• Recent military strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities have occurred, with satellites showing damage to Iran's nuclear program, though experts indicate it's not destroyed ^[7]
• Iran has announced new nuclear enrichment sites in response to UN watchdog actions ^[6]

Alternative perspectives on Iran's actions:

• Iran may view its restrictions on IAEA access as defensive measures in response to international pressure and military threats
• Western powers benefit from maintaining pressure on Iran through IAEA censure and international sanctions regimes
• Nuclear industry stakeholders and defense contractors benefit from continued tensions that justify monitoring and potential military responses

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains temporal framing that could be misleading:

• By focusing specifically on "Biden's term," it implies this is a new development when Iran's non-compliance with IAEA obligations began in 2019 ^[6]
• The question doesn't acknowledge the broader context of escalating tensions including military strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities ^[7]
• It presents the issue as binary (refuse/not refuse) when the reality shows varying degrees of cooperation and restriction over time ^[3]

The framing could serve political purposes by either attributing blame to the current administration or justifying continued pressure on Iran depending on the respondent's perspective.