In an interview with Bloomberg, he claimed that the Agency had found "types of uranium in locations where no nuclear activity was supposed to take place or where there was no equipment for this purpose." These statements were made despite Iran being one of the countries with the highest levels of cooperation with the Agency, and repeatedly stating that the claims made against it lack a valid legal and scientific basis.
What is notable in Grossi's recent positions is the disregard for Iran's extensive cooperation and the insistence on advancing a specific agenda that is more defined by Western political pressures than technical considerations. Grossi emphasized in the interview that "the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) no longer exists, only its name remains." This stance clearly goes beyond the duties of a supervisory body and shows a kind of alignment with the Western countries' strategy towards Iran. If the Agency is a technical body, why should its Director-General comment on the existence or non-existence of a political agreement?
In another part of his remarks, Grossi referred to his interactions with American and European officials, saying that "we will cooperate with the United States, Iran, and our European friends in this path." This statement clearly shows that Grossi, instead of maintaining the Agency's neutral position, is coordinating his actions with Western countries.
On the other hand, he claims that "we are not yet in the position we want to be" despite Iran being under the Agency's most severe surveillance multiple times. This contradiction indicates that the main goal of the Agency under Grossi's management is not to achieve a technical outcome, but to continue exerting political pressure on Iran.
Iran and Responding to IAEA's Dual Policies
The Islamic Republic of Iran, unlike many countries that are not members of the NPT but pursue their nuclear programs without international supervision, has always acted within the framework of international treaties. However, the behavior of the IAEA, especially during Grossi's tenure, has shown that its oversight has become more of a tool for political pressure than a legally-based mechanism. While Western countries, especially the United States, have unilaterally withdrawn from international agreements, the IAEA has not only failed to take any deterrent action against them but has also adopted an approach that effectively increases pressure on Iran.
Grossi, in his statements, while referring to the possibility of another trip to Iran, once again emphasized the need for a "new understanding". This stance shows that the IAEA Director-General, instead of adhering to existing commitments and documents, is seeking to change the rules of the game in favor of specific interests. However, the important point is that Iran has so far shown that it is not willing to accept such an approach. The statements of the Iranian President, who in response to the threats said "let's see what you can do?", sent a clear message to the IAEA and Western parties that a policy of pressure will not yield results.
Grossi's Political Game and its Consequences
Grossi's management of the International Atomic Energy Agency has shown more than ever that this institution has deviated from its technical and impartial path and has become a tool for advancing specific political goals. The emphasis on a "new understanding", disregard for previous commitments, and insistence on biased positions can all be analyzed as attempts to increase pressure on Iran. However, as Iran has shown in recent years, the IAEA's and the West's dual policies have not only been ineffective but have also led to a decrease in the credibility of international institutions.
NOURNEWS