During a visit to Poland as a guest of the ambassadors’ meeting organised by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi, gave a wide-ranging interview to Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita. The interview covered the situation at the Zaporizhia NPP (ZNPP), Iran’s nuclear capability, and other issues.
Grossi explained that the risks associated with ZNPP cannot be compared with the 1986 Chornobyl disaster. “The Chernobyl plant was built using now outdated technology. It was not protected by a dome, and the energy process was controlled by graphite, a flammable material. These are just examples of the factors that led to the explosion,” he said, noting that a similar situation could not arise at ZNPP. “This facility uses much newer Russian solutions from the 1990s. The danger here is different. The plant is located in a combat zone. If it is hit by multiple missiles, radioactive material may escape, and a disaster may occur on a regional scale. We are talking about a power plant that has six reactors, a large amount of accumulated nuclear fuel. However, it should be emphasised that the plant is not currently operational.”
Asked about Russia’s possible relaunch of the plant, he commented: “Certainly they [the Russians] took control of it not to dismantle it but to use it. “However, we are trying to convince the Russians that starting such a facility while the fighting continues is not reasonable. They seem to understand this.”
On the question of Iran’s nuclear capability following the bombing of its facilities by Israel and the US and subsequent expulsion of IAEA inspectors, Grossi said: “In the report we prepared before the start of the 12-Day War, we warned that Iran is not reporting on many of its activities related to the nuclear programme. But at the same time, we emphasised that we have no credible evidence that Iranians already have nuclear weapons.”
He added: “Our job is to establish and provide facts. And how state leaders interpret them is up to them. I don’t want to judge it….” It is important to note that having the potential to develop nuclear weapons is different from actually possessing them. The data we provided in a confidential manner indicated a certain potential for the creation of a nuclear bomb. However, this does not mean that this potential will be realised. I am a diplomat and a man of peace. I believe that negotiations are always the solution. However, this did not happen.”
Asked how long it would have taken Iran to make a nuclear weapon, Grossi replied: “It was a matter of months, maybe longer. First, the Iranians would have to convert enriched uranium into metal, which they did not start doing. Secondly, a whole range of very complex systems must be built, such as ignition systems small enough to fit into a nuclear warhead.” He added: “I understand Israel’s concerns about its security. It is also my duty to try to understand Iranian concerns. What happened, happened. We can’t change that anymore. We can now only try to make the future a little better.”
The interviewer asked about the relative merits of a diplomatic or military solution. Grossi answered: “Speaking primarily as Director of the IAEA, based on a purely technical, factual analysis – we cannot forget that Iran is a very large country, with a serious economy, significant industrial potential and technical capabilities. All this cannot be changed by military means…. We will never solve this problem by force. This can only be done through an agreement that will cover all the key issues, but above all, it will include a very strict system of verification. Many in Israel and the United States are sceptical about this. But I always tell them that it would be extremely difficult for the Iranians in such conditions to develop nuclear weapons in such a way that inspectors would not discover it.
He commented that, in a recent phone call with US President Donald Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin had emphasised that neither Russia nor any other country wants Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. “We must work hard together with the United States, the France, Germany, Great Britain, China and certainly Russia to bring about a long-term solution to the Iranian problem. After all, we have been dealing with this issue for 20 years. And it is becoming more and more serious.”
Asked whether any other countries were considering developing nuclear weapons, Grossi said: “As Ronald Reagan said – ‘trust, but verify’ – so when Poland builds a nuclear power plant, of course our inspectors will come here and check that nuclear material is not used for purposes other than civilian ones.”
In a post on X on 4 July, the IAEA said that its inspection team in Iran departed safely after remaining in Iran throughout the conflict.
IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi emphasised “the crucial importance of the IAEA discussing with Iran modalities for resuming its indispensable monitoring and verification activities in Iran as soon as possible”.
Following the Israeli and US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, Iran’s parliament passed legislation suspending cooperation with the IAEA until the Iran can ensure the “security of nuclear facilities and scientists” and guarantee its “right to uranium enrichment”.
Iran’s exit from cooperation leaves the IAEA effectively blind to the state of the country’s nuclear sites, although western intelligence services continue to monitor developments remotely. However, international inspections – a requirement under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) – have ceased.
While reaffirming Iran’s NPT commitment, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated on 2 July that all oversight would now be routed through Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, citing “obvious safety and security reasons”. Tehran accuses the IAEA of complicity in the military strikes on its safeguarded sites. Officials have barred Grossi from entering the country and signalled possible legal action.
