TEHRAN – Rafael Grossi, head of the UN Nuclear Watch Agency, has repeatedly bent the standards he is being detained to appease the West regarding Iran’s nuclear program. Naturally, his latest remarks at a press conference ahead of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) governor’s meeting in June were immersed in prejudice and political agenda.
The press conference revisited the leaked content of a confidential report Grossi provided to IAEA member states on May 31, drove old, long, disassembled allegations against Iran. The report’s claims on “secret” nuclear activities appear to be designed to lay the foundations for the US, UK and France to accuse Iran of violating its non-proliferation obligations during a meeting in June this year.
Below we look at Grossi’s recycled accusations against Iran and assess whether they retain the merit.
The IAEA’s political role for Iran
Faced with reporters, Grossi has submitted many questions about Iran’s nuclear program, claiming that the resolution proposed by the US and E3 (Germany, France and the UK) (which Iran denies non-compliance) is “separate” from the ongoing Iran negotiations. “There is no formal link between one thing and the other,” he said before contradicting, “But it is clear that there is a mutual relationship and mutual influence. Perhaps not. Certainly, it is mutual influence.”
However, critics argue that the evidence shows that the IAEA prioritizes using nuclear disputes with Iran for political and personal interests in fulfilling its technical and legal obligations, particularly under Grossi’s leadership. As the Tehran Times previously reported, Grossi is entrusted by E3 by undermining nuclear talks between Iran and the US, where Europe is being sidelined by the E3. His close ties with Israel include multiple visits to occupying territories despite the lack of surveillance of Israel’s nuclear facilities – eroding his credibility.
By recycling old claims, the IAEA reveals its true purpose. It produces pretexts to blame Tehran rather than genuine concern about Iran’s nuclear activity, thereby creating leverage to draw concessions at the negotiation table. According to information previously released by Thehran Times, Europe supported Grossi’s bid to make Europe the next UN Secretary-General.
JCPOA hypocrisy
Elsewhere in his remarks on Monday, Grossi argued that the 2015 Nuclear Trade (JCPOA) that the US unilaterally abandoned under Donald Trump is no longer sufficient. Because the West was abolished for years, Iran has reduced its commitment in response to an updated US and European sanction.
Ignoring the harsh economic costs that these sanctions forced on Iran, Grossi argued that the IAEA must retain testing rights for Iran’s nuclear sites, even if the JCPOA collapses. This stance exposes the IAEA double standard. Iran is under pressure to support its obligations, but the West is not facing accountability that violates the agreement at first.
Again, Grossi’s statements raise questions about the IAEA’s obligation to be free from fairness and political bias.
Defective alarms for uranium enrichment
On the issue of uranium enrichment, Grossi acknowledged that the activity itself is not prohibited under international law. Iranian officials frequently emphasize it. “Uranium enrichment itself is not a forbidden activity,” he admitted, repeating Tehran’s long-standing position.
Still, he expressed “concern” over Iran’s uranium stockpile, despite providing no evidence of its connection to the nuclear weapons program. This selective alarm ignores important facts. Increased levels of enrichment in Iran is a direct response to Western violations of the JCPOA. If the IAEA is really fair, it addresses the underlying cause of non-compliance in the West rather than scapegoing Iran.
Watchdog that bars commands
Grossi’s latest statement supports a nasty pattern. The IAEA has not functioned much as an equitable technical institution under his leadership, and serves as a political tool for Western powers. By denialing the allegations and ignoring the Western role in undermining the JCPOA, Grossi undermines the agency’s reliability.
If the IAEA really wants to maintain non-proliferation, it must divorce from geopolitical pressures and return to its mission: objective, factual assessment. Until then, reports on Iran are merely recycled propaganda and will serve the benefit of those who pull the string.