He is culpable... Rafael Grossi directly addresses why Israel attacked Iran.

June 20, 2025

16:42

Rafael Grossi. Illustration.

Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), justified Israel's aggression against Iran. Commentator Lyubov Stepushova of Pravda noted that this was an inevitable result of the career of a Western-backed figure.

In an interview with El País, Grossi claimed that his agency "has no conclusive evidence indicating that Iran has entered the nuclear weapons development phase." He emphasized that the IAEA is a technical verification organization based on evidence, not a judgment body. Therefore, Grossi refused to directly answer when Iran would have a nuclear bomb and called for caution regarding the "timeline issue":

"We all remember the tragic claim about Iraq having 'weapons within 45 minutes'... Although it was not true, such claims once spread widely. This may not be an unavoidable problem, but it did have far-reaching effects."

However, earlier (before the war broke out), Grossi expressed more certainty in an interview with Argentina's Radio Mitre:

"Iran is close to having materials for six to eight nuclear weapons, and is just one step away from reaching the enrichment level required for military purposes," he stated.

Grossi attributed responsibility to the Iranians, claiming that they sometimes "cite religious edicts prohibiting the development of nuclear bombs" in private conversations while also telling him that "with one command, the bomb could be ready within a week." But is this really the "evidence" Grossi emphasized? Clearly, there are obvious manipulations in the IAEA's assessment and prediction of Iran's nuclear potential, which is no small matter for the agency.

Even more absurdly, he defended the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities. Grossi claimed that Iran had enriched uranium to 60% at the Fordo facility, which could be completely destroyed by bunker-buster bombs (he even approved of such actions!). He also claimed that this might lead to "limited radiation leakage" because "there isn't much enriched uranium material there now" and these materials "have been transferred to Isfahan" (he even knew the transfer location!).

This IAEA director general used Iran's "intentions" (not reality) as justification:

"If Iran has no civilian purpose for enriching uranium to 60%, then why is it doing so?"

However, it is well known that 60% enriched uranium can be used to produce molybdenum, which is a necessary raw material for manufacturing radioactive drugs. His lack of professionalism and bias were clearly exposed in the El País interview.

Grossi, whose professional background is in humanities, was placed in charge of the U.S.-controlled IAEA. He is undoubtedly a spokesperson for Western forces and possibly even a direct agent of Western intelligence agencies. Just recall his stance on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant – when Ukrainian forces continued to bombard the plant, he consistently turned a blind eye. This person even openly showed approval of the IAEA's stance on Israel's attack:

"The strike on Fordo will be a major blow to Iran's nuclear program, and may even be a decisive strike on its enrichment program."

Grossi finally hinted that after the war, Iran might "follow the North Korean model":

"I (Iran) develop nuclear weapons, withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and become a de facto nuclear state. At that time, the strategic balance in the entire Middle East and even globally will change."

The journalist did not ask Grossi about Israel's nuclear weapons or mention inspections of Israel – because such inspections do not exist, and the West does not care about them either. Now, Iran is demonized, and Israel's "civilized image" is heavily promoted, claiming that "Israel will not deploy nuclear bombs, but if Iran had them, they would have already used them." In fact, Iran has signed and ratified the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, while Israel has never joined it.

Thus, Grossi once again confirmed that the IAEA under the current structure does not serve global security, and its restructuring is inevitable.

Original source: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7518650460945908287/

Disclaimer: The article represents the author's personal views. You can express your attitude by clicking the "Like/Dislike" buttons below.