Interview with Rafael Mariano Grossi, Director General of the IAEA, on 'Face the Nation,' June 28, 2025
MARGARET BRENNAN: We now turn our attention to the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi, welcome back to our show.
RAFAEL MARIANO GROSSI: Thank you, Margaret. It's good to be here again.
MARGARET BRENNAN: There's a lot of news coming from Iran. The U.S. airstrikes have reportedly caused severe damage to their nuclear sites, and Israel has targeted top Iranian scientists. What is the current status of Iran’s nuclear capabilities?
GROSSI: Yes, indeed, it's a critical situation. Iran's nuclear infrastructure, specifically facilities like Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan which were involved in uranium processing, have experienced significant destruction. Although some facilities remain operational, the setback is considerable. The main question now is what steps will be taken next. While Iran evaluates the extent of damage, the IAEA will eventually need to resume its monitoring role to track ongoing activities and access remaining materials, depending on the resumption of international negotiations.
MARGARET BRENNAN: President Trump has been advocating for renewed diplomatic negotiations with Iran. You frequently communicate with envoy Steve Witkoff. Are those discussions continuing? Would the IAEA partake in any resulting deals?
GROSSI: Ultimately, yes. If the diplomatic efforts succeed, verifying Iran's compliance would naturally fall to the IAEA, hence our regular discussions with Witkoff. We must eventually work through the trauma of recent events to reestablish inspection protocols and ensure any agreements are verifiable and enforceable.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Iran recently passed legislation to suspend cooperation with IAEA inspectors, and their foreign minister stated he won't permit your entry into the country. Does this signal a complete expulsion of your inspectors there?
GROSSI: I hope not. The Iranian government is still interpreting this new law, but it's crucial to recall that Iran is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, requiring them to collaborate with us. We need to negotiate the terms under which inspections will resume, beyond mere internal legislation, to ensure international treaty obligations persist.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Can you confirm if Iran's reported protective measures on its nuclear assets were shared with the IAEA? Did they inform you about relocating materials or equipment?
GROSSI: No, Iran did not provide such specifics, especially given the rapid progression of events. While they announced a new enrichment site in Isfahan before the strikes, which we were scheduled to visit, the site now faces significant damage, underscoring the need for re-engagement despite any grievances surrounding the conflict.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Before these events, did Iran disclose the whereabouts of its highly enriched uranium caches to you?
GROSSI: Iran signaled intentions to safeguard assets but without specific details to us. While some materials might remain intact, others could've been relocated or destroyed. Verification on the location and status of such materials is essential to prevent potential risks of further proliferation.
MARGARET BRENNAN: With our limited knowledge on the whereabouts of crucial materials like uranium or centrifuges, could Iran feasibly accelerate a nuclear weapon development?
GROSSI: While we don’t want to spread alarm, understanding the exact state of Iran’s program is vital. Despite setbacks, their sophisticated knowledge remains, challenging the notion that military action can provide a lasting resolution over diplomatic alternatives for stability.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The IAEA still managed some inspections before the military strikes, right? What did your teams observe in the lead-up to these recent occurrences?
GROSSI: Indeed, inspections persisted, albeit amidst challenges and limitations in transparency. We had consistent access in verifying declared centrifuge numbers and material quantities, but gaps existed in other areas, leaving much unknown due to recent disruptions.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Did Iran’s latest actions signal an interest in weaponizing their nuclear program?
GROSSI: It's crucial to clarify; Iran has not developed nuclear weapons. Our responsibility is reporting observable activities, not deducing intentions. Nevertheless, unexplained traces and unanswered questions remain, reinforcing the necessity for direct engagement.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The Iranian foreign minister criticizes your past reports, suggesting they've incited military action. How do you respond to such assertions?
GROSSI: While understandable from their perspective, it’s unrealistic to blame IAEA assessments for military decisions. Our reports have consistently communicated the state of affairs transparently, devoid of exaggerated conclusions on weapons or capabilities.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Many here in America seek clarity amid varied intelligence assessments on Iran's nuclear timeline post-strikes. What is your assessment?
GROSSI: Forecasts on Iran's nuclear potential vary widely based on differing assumptions and goals. While substantial damage has occurred, Iran retains the know-how and could recover capabilities, underlining the importance of reaching a sustainable diplomatic solution.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Thank you for your insights today, Director General.
GROSSI: It's always a pleasure, thank you, Margaret.
Leave a Reply