Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. Meanwhile, we do need to turn back to the Iran war because the International Atomic Energy Agency says that it has lost contact with Iran's Atomic Safety Regulator. Now, the IAEA Director General, Raphael Grossi joins us now live from Vienna. We also want to welcome our radio audience for this conversation as well,
Director General. That is exactly where I want to start, and it's what the channel of communication looks like with Iron right now and what you're doing to try to re establish it.
Well.
Yes, of course, we have to consider that we are in a war situation, so communications are not as smooth and easy as they should normally. Eb you've seen that even dignitaries and have had from iranficulty, and the Foreign Minister for example, was one of those accepted. So we have as normal part of our operations channels of communication with different institutions in the nuclear establishment so to speak in Iran, including the nuclear regulator, and we haven't been
able to communicate with them. That doesn't mean we have no communication with Iran. We are in contact with the Permanent Mission here in Vienna, and we have other channels of communication as well, So it's partly concerning, but that doesn't mean that we are not talking to.
Them well to that point. I mean, what has the outright outreach looked like from Arian? Are they reaching out to you or are you reaching out to them or some sort of mixture.
Here, it's a mix. We have to consider that up until next week.
Sorry.
Last week, sorry, we had an ongoing negotiation, and then of course war started on Saturday morning, which changes everything. So I guess that at the moment we cannot go back to business as usual, although what we were having was no longer business as usual since June twenty twenty five with the Twelfth Day War, so the conditions and the communications were not as smooth as they used to be in the past. So at the moment, I think we are all in a sort of wait and see situation.
We are trying to ascertain what is going on on the ground. We are following day by day, minute by minute, what is happening with the nuclear sites. Of course, this military campaign is in a certain sense different from the last years in that the nuclear sites do not seem to have been at the center or the main.
Objective of this campaign.
I'm not a military expert, and we are only basing our comments on what we see on the ground.
So so far, there hasn't.
Been evidence of massive attacks or attacks on the facilities. There are a couple of images that seem to point to some damage one of the poortals in Natans, but it doesn't seem to be a continued effort there.
But of course this may change tomorrow.
We do not know what is the evolution at the theater of operations there.
I'm glad you clarified that point, since we did hear from Iron's envoy claiming that they did see some targeted attacks. When it comes to what's going on in the toons, I do want to talk about what your organization's role is here, since you did have a technical role. Of course, when it comes to the diplomatic efforts between Iran and the US, I know you said earlier today that frustrated
to see the collapse of those efforts. But how do you view the role that the IAEA has here and whether or not there's anything you can do to bridge that gap.
Well, our role is simply dispensable. As you know, the IAA aka the Nuclear Watchdog, we are the Nuclear Inspector all over the world of all nuclear facilities, and in particular we have been having a process with Iran, a process which has not been an easy one because Iran has not always complied with all their obligations in terms
of informing of everything they were doing. But we were having this relationship since the war we lost some access, important accesses to places where we used to inspect, including these three main sites you know four though natans Isfahan and we were in this sort of talking past each other, we requesting them to have access to these facilities, and Iran putting a number of reasons why or arguing that we could not return for this or that reason.
Of course, the mediation led by.
The money Foreign Minister started and at some point when the conversations started to acquire some momentum, they judge and rightly so that the presence of the Director General of the IEA would add to the realism and the concreteness of this conversation, because in nuclear diplomacy, you can express a general principle, for example, not have nuclear weapons or enrich only for medical purposes, but then you have to turn that general principle into something concrete.
What does that mean? What are you planning to do.
Where how many centrifuges, how many cascades, what are the levels of enriched How are you going to verify that?
And for that?
Of course, each side may have its own ideas, but we as a EEA, we can tell this is what is necessary for this stated intention or activity, and then propose the necessary verification. Any agreement without verification is just a piece of paper. It's not an agreement, it's an illusion of an agreement. So I think this was making our presence around that table indispensable.
So we have to see now what's going to happen next?
And I am curious. I mean, this is the second time in less than a year that we've seen these negotiations be interrupted by a military strike. You referenced that twelve day war back in June. And with that in mind, Director General, do you feel that diplomacy is still the only option out of this conflict?
Well, in my opinion, yes, if you want to define a rurable, long lasting, stable solution. So of course at the moment we are in the midst of a conflict, of a military operation. So the countries participating or the belligerents may have a different idea. From my perspective, what we see is that even with this kinetic phase of the conflict, at some point this will come to an end,
hopefully sooner rather than later. And when that happens, you will still have a question mark around these activities, these nuclear activities, and we will have to go back to the negotiating table. This is what we mean when we say we need a diplomatic solution.
And next week, my understanding is that you're meeting with Emmanuel Macron of France. France which just announced that it's preparing to increase is the number of nuclear weapons in its stockpile because basically it's uncertain of US security guarantees. And I'm curious to hear your perspective on how you're interpreting those decisions.
Well, I would say that all of these decisions and what is happening not only in France, but in other countries, in at least in all nuclear weapons states as recognized by the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, we see that given the strategic fragmentation, given the degree of polarization that we are seeing in the world, unfortunately, we are in a phase where there is we may be frustrated by this, but there is an increased reliance
on nuclear weapons, and this is a concerning development, but it's the reality. It is the reality. We would like to see a world with less nuclear weapons. We would like to see eventually a world without nuclear weapons. You may remember that at some point even the President of the United States, the previous president of the United States, was talking about that. But today, as we see the world, the world as it is, we are seeing an increased reliance on nuclear weapons.
In part maybe because of what you mentioned.
Countries are looking at their own security in terms of their autonomy to take their own security decisions without depending on someone else.
We believe that.
An increased number of nuclear weapons perhaps is not the ideal way to secure a more stable and peaceful world. But this is the reality that we are seeing. And from my perspective from the IEA, what concerns us is the fact that countries that heretofore have not had nuclear weapons are talking about that because you mentioned France.
France.
Of course, France is one of the five countries according to the Treaty on the Non Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. By the way, in coincidence, the five permanent members of the Security Council. They have an arsenal, and perhaps this arsenal goes up or goes down.
It's not going to.
Change the overall equation, but what we are seeing, and this is more traveling if you want, there is that countries that up until now where the.
Director General, unfortunately we are up against the clock, really hate to cut you off, really appreciate your time. That is Raphael Mariano Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency,