Tehran – A professor of geopolitics says Rafael Grossi, director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, is heavily responsible for the Israeli regime and the US attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
“As the director of the IAEA, Grossi has a heavy responsibility for attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities,” wrote Abdreza Faraj Rad in an article published in the Iranian newspaper on June 24th.
Israel launched an attack on Iran on June 13, killing many Iranian military officials and nuclear experts, and attacking nuclear sites in Ford, Natanz and Isfahan. Rather, five times a day during the war, the Zionist regime clashed with the heavy water reactor of Condub.
Also, on June 22nd, after his death in the night, the US dropped bombs at nuclear facilities in Ford, Natantz and Isfahan.
Faraj Rad, ambassador to Iran for Norway and Hungary, said “Grossi appears to be in full coordination with the Israeli regime and the West” and “refusing to play his lowest legislation.”
The text in his article, heading “Grossi sacrificed the credibility of the Western IAEA” is as follows:
Over the past two to three decades, the Islamic Republic of Iran has consistently worked with the IAEA. These collaborations have been influenced by the approach, priorities and political affiliation of this head of the international organization over a variety of periods.
Some of the agency’s directors have sought to act according to professional and impartial principles based on legal and technical duties, while others have deviated from fairness due to political preferences and preferences in a particular country.
But what distinguishes Rafael Grossi in all these times is the way he engages and interacts with Iran.
Many analysts believe his approach has wandered from the institution’s legal and regulatory framework, turning it into a one-sided, comprehensive collaboration with the West. Not only did Grossi fail to maintain the agency’s fame and legal status, but he also openly deviated from the obligations and regulations of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
According to the treaty, countries engaged in peaceful nuclear activities, including enrichment, under the supervision of the agency, must be protected from military attacks and threats from other countries. According to legal procedures by government agencies, military action against a country is not permitted, even if it is assumed that it is deviating from the regulations of the agency or is on the path to obtaining nuclear weapons. Violations must first be reported to the Governor’s Committee and, after the examination, be referred to the UN Security Council if necessary.
Grossi recognized it had unprecedented cooperation with the agency and accepted the most testing during his tenure. Even in the weeks before Israel’s military attacks on Iran, he said the Islamic Republic was not approaching nuclear weapons. However, by presenting a comprehensive report containing troubling claims and ambiguity, he effectively paved the way for the adoption of the IAEA Committee’s resolution.
Without a doubt, not all causes and motives for attacks on Iran are attributed to this report, but its importance and impact on pre-attack diplomacy and security trends cannot be denied.
Now, following these events, Grossi, as director of the IAEA, is heavily responsible for attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Grossi is in full coordination with the Israeli regime and the West, and appears to have refused to even play the role of his lowest law. Iran’s approach of distrust with the institution and his own lead him to a lack of hope for continued constructive cooperation in the future.
In summary, it can be said that Iran’s relationship with the institutions within Grossi’s management is going through one of the most difficult and tense periods of bilateral cooperation. Such an approach by the IAEA and Grossi does not benefit international cooperation or strengthen the non-proliferation regime.