A statement marked by audacity

In his opening statement at the seasonal meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, made notable yet misleading remarks regarding Iran’s nuclear file. A comprehensive critique and analysis of this statement require extensive discussion, but briefly, three points raised in the statement can be addressed.

Grossi claimed: 

•  The IAEA plays an important and impartial role in addressing this complex and sensitive issue and has an essential role in verifying any new agreement. 
•  We have sought explanations and clarifications from Iran regarding the presence of uranium particles. Unfortunately, Iran has either failed to respond to the IAEA’s questions or has not provided technically credible answers. 
•  I am convinced that the only way forward is through a diplomatic solution, with strong support for the IAEA’s verification arrangements.

In critiquing these three claims by Grossi, it suffices to say that one of the main reasons the political dimensions of Iran’s nuclear file have overshadowed its legal and technical aspects is precisely the unbalanced, biased, and entirely political performance of the IAEA Director General himself. In other words, before unjustifiably condemning Iran’s nuclear activities, Grossi should acknowledge his negative role in failing to defend Iran’s legitimate and legal rights as a member of the IAEA and the NPT.  

“Transparency” and “confidence-building” are buzzwords Grossi frequently uses regarding Iran’s nuclear file. The key point is that Iran adhered to its safeguards and even beyond-safeguards commitments for a full year after the U.S.’s unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA nuclear deal.

It was only after the end of its strategic patience, due to Washington and the European troika’s insistence on a maximum pressure strategy, that Iran, in full compliance with the JCPOA, began a step-by-step reduction of its commitments. In such circumstances, instead of addressing the primary cause of this situation, Grossi portrays Iran—the aggrieved party—as the one under scrutiny. 

Grossi emphasizes the IAEA’s impartial role in Iran’s nuclear file! It seems the Director General of the ostensibly international atomic energy agency has forgotten that his insistence on keeping the so-called “alleged cases” file open indefinitely has had a destructive impact on efforts to revive the JCPOA in recent years, subsequently creating complex technical-legal knots in this file. 

Grossi has resorted to baseless and entirely orchestrated narratives about the nuclear file of a country that has cooperated fully within the framework of its safeguards commitments with the IAEA and, in some cases, even increased access to demonstrate its goodwill. 

Issuing such an audacious statement (especially under current circumstances) reaffirms that Grossi is not acting as the head of an international organization but as a pawn in the West’s strategic puzzle against the Iranian nation and system. Undoubtedly, any IAEA action against Iran, including the issuance of a new resolution, will have severe consequences for this non-independent organization and the main sponsors of such resolutions, and it will not lead to Iran retreating from its legitimate rights.