Transcript: Rafael Mariano Grossi, Iaa Director General, on

The following is the transcription of an interview with Rafael Mariano Grossi, the general director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which will be issued in “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan” on June 29, 2025. The interview was recorded on June 27, 2025.

Margaret Brennan: And now we go to the general director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or the OIEA. General Director Rafael Mariano Grossi, welcome to the program.

General Director Rafael Mariano Grossi: Thank you very much, Margaret. It’s good to talk to you again.

Margaret Brennan: General Director, a lot is happening. I hope you can guide us through what you know. Iran’s Foreign Minister has said that the damage to its nuclear bombing facilities in the United States is significant and serious. We know that Israel has also killed several Iranian nuclear scientists. What exactly is Iran’s ability at this time?

Grossi General Director: Well, yes, and I think you can choose any adjective to characterize this, but you will see that there is an agreement to describe this as a very serious level of damage. It may be, you know, described in different ways, but it is clear that what happened in particular in Fordo, Natanz, Isfahan, where Iran used to have and still has, to some extent, the capacities in terms of treatment, conversion and enrichment of uranium have been destroyed to an important degree. Some are still standing. Then, of course, there is an important setback in terms of these capacities. That is, this is clear. And now the important theme, the important thing is, what are the next steps? Now, the characterization of the damage, I think we can, you know, speculate, and still, until, of course, the Iranians themselves will have to go there and examine the rubble and look at what is the exact degree of the damage. At some point, the OIEA will have to return. Although our work is not to evaluate the damage, but to restore the knowledge of the activities that take place there, and access to the material, which is very, very important, the material they will produce if they continue with this activity. This depends on others, you see, everything is connected. This is: this depends on the negotiations that can restart or not, so what we see this here, I think we have a snapshot of a program that has been very damaged, to quote Dr. Araghchi. And now what we must focus on is in the next steps.

Margaret Brennan: You mentioned your diplomacy. President Trump has been asking for diplomatic conversations with Iran to solve all problems around the nuclear program. I know you were in regular contact with the envoy Steve Witkoff. Are you talking to him now? Will the OIEA participate in any agreement?

Grossi General Director: Well, at some point we will have to be, because if your efforts, that all my heart support, will succeed, this will reach a point where there is any agreement, some understanding about the things that will continue to do, and some things where there could be an agreement on certain restrictions. And, of course, who is going to verify that is the OIEA, so we are in constant contact. Now they need to reconnect. And it will not be easy, one can imagine, after the traumatic events that took place. Even for us, I may have seen that I wrote to the Minister of Foreign Affairs Araghchi a few days ago, immediately, I would say that, after the cessation of high fire was sustaining, and I told him that perhaps we should sit and gradually analyze the reconnection, the modalities for the inspectors to go. Therefore, there is a level in which the OIEA is not involved, and this is the direct conversation. What is the treatment? And then, of course, we will connect to ensure that this agreement is and is verifiable.

Margaret Brennan: But until that moment, Tehran has just approved a law that says they want to suspend cooperation with the IEA inspectors. The Foreign Minister said he had no plans to leave him personally, Mr. Director General, in the country. Does that mean that they will completely block all inspectors? Those you already have in the country have access?

Grossi: Well, I certainly hope this is not the case. I think what the Foreign Minister said were that they were investigating this law and how this law would affect our activities. I think it’s time, that is why it is so important that we are around the table and investigate it. Iran, and I think no one has questioned that, and I hope nobody does it, it is part of the treaty on the non -proliferation of nuclear weapons, as more than 190 countries in the world. So, that implies that they have to work with the agency. So we have to go: we have been going through this law they have, that the Majles approved, and we see that they are talking about cooperation based on the safety and safety of their sites. I think that is not incompatible with the inspection work that must take place. But, of course, they are not Rafael Grossi and Margaret Brennan discussing this that we will resolve. I think we have to sit with Iran and investigate this, because at the end of the day, all this, after military strikes, will have to have a lasting solution, which cannot be more diplomatic.

Margaret Brennan: So they are not kicking, are they not kicking their inspectors at this time?

Grossi General Director: Not in this regard. I would not say that I am looking for interest and some concern what they have approved. But, of course, it is your law. It is his parliament. But you know, there are legal implications here. An international treaty, of course, has priority. You cannot invoke an internal law so as not to comply with an international treaty. But Iran does not say that at this time, and I think this is constructive. So, that is why I think we have to go to details, because the work will have to continue, otherwise, no one will have an idea of ​​what is happening in Iran. Iran will continue with a nuclear program, whose contours have not yet seen each other and I will be sure that part of these negotiations, which I hope, resume soon.

Margaret Brennan: Iran officially reported weeks ago they were going to take measures before these strikes to try to protect their nuclear assets. Did you share with the OIEA what were those plans? Where were they going to save things like centrifuging, machines that help enrich fuel? Where were they going to put the gas boats that had enriched uranium?

Grossi General Director: No, no, they did not report that for us, but at the same time, there was no physical time, perhaps, to do so. Iran, for example, had announced that they had a new enrichment installation in Isfahan, and we were going to go on June 13 to verify that installation so that the site and the site have been severely damaged and beaten. So, that is why I say it is indispensable. We will have to, aggravating or not, feelings and emotions or not, you have to get with cold heads. We sit around the table and we see what I mean, these protection measures, of course, it is their right to protect their assets, like any other sovereign nation. They can, of course, protect, but know and there are, I do not want to be too technical or legal in this conversation, but there are provisions in the agreements we have, not only with Iran, with any country. If a country at one time feels that some of the things we inspect must be protected or whatever, they have to tell us, and we have to go, etc., etc., as you can imagine. So, this could not happen due to the development of the circumstances, of a military conflict where, of course, you know, decisions are made and this is not planned or announced, obviously. So now, now is the time to connect and talk and talk to each other.

Margaret Brennan: Yes, but there were approximately 400 kilograms, which is less than 900 pounds, highly enriched uranium, before the attacks. I know these are in small and relatively easy to move boats. Do you have any idea where it moved and if it moved before the attack?

Grossi General Director: We assume, and I think it is logical to assume that when they announce that they will take protection measures, this could be part of that. But, as I said, we don’t know where this material could be, or if part of it could have been, you know, under the attack during those 12 days. Then, some could have been destroyed as part of the attack, but some could have been moved. Then there must be a clarification at some point. If we do not get that clarification, this will continue to hang, you know, about our heads as a potential problem. So, that is why I say that it is so important, in the first place, that they will allow our inspectors to continue their indispensable work as soon as possible.

Margaret Brennan: Well, I ask you what things could continue to be, because there is that open question that Iran runs to a bomb even now, if they wanted. If we do not know where the highly enriched uranium is and we cannot account for all the centrifugators, are it a risk that they can hurry towards a bomb?

Grossi General Director: Well, you know, we don’t want to be alarmists here, and I don’t want to be part of, you know, a message that would extend, as I say, alarm. But we must be in a position to determine, to confirm what is there, and where it is and what happened. Iran had a very vast ambitious program, and part of it can still be there, and if not, there is also the obvious truth that knowledge is there. Industrial capacity is there. Iran is a very sophisticated country in terms of nuclear technology, as is obvious. So you can’t disincept this. You cannot undo the knowledge you have or the abilities you have. It is a huge country, isn’t it? So I think this should be the incentive that we must all have to understand that military operations or not, you will not solve this definitively. You will have an agreement. It will have an inspection system that will give everyone, to all in the region and other places, the guarantees that we can, we can definitely turn the page.

Margaret Brennan: Until just before the strikes, the OIEA still had inspectors, as I understand, going to some of these sites. There has been a lot of focus here in the United States in trucks and satellite images outside Fordo. What was happening in those days before the strike?

Grossi General Director: Well, as I was pointing out, there was an announcement of protection measures that could have included equipment and motion material. We don’t know. We saw the same images that everyone has seen of these trucks, and we do not want to reach any hurried conclusion about it, but it is clear that we need the things we ignore, that’s fine. And after a reasonable period, after the war, there must be a process that must continue. Otherwise, uncertainties will continue, they will continue to persist. And this is, you know, in a final analysis, not good, and perhaps even avoiding a good agreement, because who will have an agreement in which he does not know what the counterpart really has? What are the assets they really have after this, after this, this military campaign that took place?

Margaret Brennan: So even these attacks, Iran, Iran was still revealing information to the OIEA-

Grossi General Director:-Well yes, yes, yes, yes–

Margaret Brennan: -In certain quantities—

Grossi General Director: There were deficits. There were deficits, and we referred to those in the sense that there were some things that did not clarify us. But our inspection work was constant. In particular, in this sensitive area of ​​the number of centrifugers and the amount of material, we had a perfect vision. We had no opinion about other things we wanted to have. But in this case, I was complete. It was integral. And, of course, at this time, there is nothing.

Margaret Brennan: Bue No, Iran was not maintaining its enriched uranium reserve. The world was worried

Grossi General Director: –No–

Margaret Brennan: -You said he was worried about that. Why do you think it was destined? And did you see something that suggested that they were looking to arm themselves?

Grossi General Director: Let me be clear here, because we said, first, something very, very important. They have all these capabilities, but for the agency, first of all, they had no nuclear weapons. Well? This must be said. One can have an evaluation at the national level that were close, okay? And I do not enter that, because we, the OIEA, do not judge the intentions. The OIEA analyzes the activities of a country and informs the world. Therefore, they are the countries that, well, well, this is worrying or not. What we were aware, what, what worried me is that there were other things that were not clear. For example, we had found traces of uranium in some places in Iran, which were not the declared normal facilities. And we were asking for years, why do we find these traces of enriched uranium instead x, y o z? And we were simply receiving credible answers. If there was material, where is this material? Then there could be even more. We don’t know. That is why it is, I’m sorry, he repeated it for the third time, I think we must return.

Margaret Brennan: Understood, understood. But his statement and that report he gave about some of these open questions or unanswered questions, the Iranians point it out now, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs seems to be blaming military attacks. He said he was not honest and fair, his report. He said that after the facilities, you did not even condemn the strikes, after the strikes, I should say. What are you doing of those criticisms?

Grossi General Director: Well, to some extent, I understand. They have been under attack. But, really, who can believe that this conflict occurred due to an OIEA report? And, by the way, what there was: what was in that report was not new, Margaret. We have been saying that for a long time, and in previous reports as well. So, this is because it is easier, perhaps, to criticize an international organization or a general director, I do not know, but it is not reasonable to say that. And, in any case, the OIEA, as always, has had a very honest evaluation of the situation. And there were many, I can assure you that there were many who, who said in their report, you must say that they have nuclear weapons, or are very close to having nuclear weapons. And we didn’t. We simply did not, because this was not what we were seeing.

Margaret Brennan: But you also said that you could not verify that it was a peaceful program.

Grossi General Director: Absolutely, because we have to see everything.

Margaret Brennan: Yes.

Grossi General Director: They did, we didn’t see them. We did not see a program that was pointing in that direction, but at the same time, they did not answer very important questions that were pending. So this is: this is the truth.

Margaret Brennan: And I appreciate the nuances here, because there is a lot of gray. The people here are looking for clarity, and there is confusion in the United States. News reports that the defense intelligence agency evaluates Iran’s program was delayed a few months, but once they dig, they could resume in several months. They have to rebuild electrical and water supplies. The national CIA and intelligence directors say that the facilities were destroyed, and would have been rebuilding for years. Israel says that the military program is backed up many years. What is the truth here? What do you do about these evaluations?

Grossi General Director: You know, you know what, this sand watch approach in weapons of mass destruction is not a good idea. Remember, we had cases of 45 minutes, etc., which were quite out of place. All that depends on his metrics, Margaret. If you tell me it will take two months or three months, for what?

Margaret Brennan: Correct.

Grossi General Director: The capabilities they have are there. They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, some centrifuging waterfalls turn and produce enriched uranium, or less than that. But as I said, frankly, one cannot affirm that everything has disappeared and that there is nothing there.

Because, in the first place, as I- and I believe that intelligence, we are not doing any military evaluation, first of all, but, outside the logic of our conversation, it is clear that there has been serious damage, but it is not total damage, first. And secondly, Iran has the abilities there; Industrial and technological capacities. So, if you wish, you can start doing this again. This is again, and sorry, fourth time, we have to return to the table and have a technically solid solution for this. Otherwise, this will come again, in terms of a situation that is not well clarified. And this is an opportunity. We have a chance now.

Margaret Brennan: Understood, and we will see if that opportunity is collected on both sides. General Director, thanks for your time today.

Grossi General Director: Thank you, as always, a pleasure. Thank you so much.

• International Atomic Energy Agency