I am actually quite shocked that you sound clueless about nuclear safety but you're still talking about it.
First of all, the Persian Gulf is not prone to tsunamis. There's no strong enough seismic activity in the Persian Gulf region, and believe me, I spent almost an hour Googling and reading different scientific articles that popped up and none of them mentioned the Persian Gulf as a region under the threat of tsunamis or capable of strong seismic activity like in Japan. Not even close. And the history of the region has not witnessed tsunamis that caught media's attention and I can say that as a person who lives here and believe me, if any strong tsunami had happened, people would've heard about it. The closest thing to a tsunami in the entire history of the Persian Gulf that I could find is this which is like a fart in the storm compared to what happened in Japan and it occurred in the north-east shore of the Persian Gulf close to the Strait of Hormuz:
On 19 March 2017, destructive tsunami-like waves impacted the northeast shore of the Persian Gulf (PG). The maximum surveyed runup of about 3 m was observed at Dayyer in southern Iran, where damaging waves inundated the land for a distance of ~ 1 km and resulted in the deaths of five people...
link.springer.com
Even if some earthquake happens in the Indian Ocean or the Sea of Oman, it won't reach Bushehr. Nothing of the sort has been heard of in that region. No country neighboring the Persian Gulf seems worried about tsunamis, with some of the world's most important oil and gas infrastructures in this region that contribute a lot to the world's energy security, all unprepared for this scenario because it's extremely unlikely. The Indian Ocean or the Sea of Oman can create tsunamis, but it will most likely affect our eastern coast, the UAE, Oman and Pakistan, not Bushehr which is beyond the Straight of Hormuz and is in a place where the depth of water barely exceeds 30 meters and could be probably hundreds of kilometres away from where it could potentially happen.
Secondly, in a light water reactor, there's a passive nuclear safety mechanism that is there by design and does not need operator intervention to activate. A pressurized water reactor has a large negative void coefficient which makes it self-regulating. Because it uses light water as both the moderator and the coolant, if the flow of coolant stops and it becomes hotter, the reactor will become less reactive and it will shut itself down instead of exploding. So, basically once you position the control rods, the reactor will keep its temperature on its own more or less. That's why the Fukushima incident never became a disaster, unlike the Chernobyl incident. Pressurized water reactors generally have a more negative void coefficient than boiling water reactors, which makes them passively safer against a loss of coolant accident.
The fact that you are even comparing the Bushehr reactor with an accident like the Chernobyl shows how clueless you really are.
And as long as there's Turkey in our neighborhood, nobody would even put their dirty pants in Greece. lol
Also, the water you see there is not the shore itself, our 19-year old self-claimed nuclear safety expert.