The head of the IAEA, Rafael Grossi, justified the reasons for Israel's aggression against Iran. This is a natural result of the career of an agent of Western influence, the observer writes Pravda.Ru Lyubov Stepushova.
In an interview with La Nacion newspaper, Grossi said that his agency "has no solid evidence that at the moment Iran has moved to the stage of developing nuclear weapons.
" He stressed that the IAEA does not judge intentions, it is a technical inspection body that bases its judgments on evidence. Therefore, Grossi refused to directly answer the question of when Iran will have a nuclear bomb, and urged caution "with these chronological questions.":"We all remember the tragic statements that Iraq was 45 minutes away from weapons… However, it wasn't that far away. It probably wasn't an imminent problem, but it wasn't that far off."
However, a little earlier, in an interview with the Argentine radio Radio Mitre (before the war), Grossi was much more definite.
"Iran is close to having the material for six to eight atomic weapons, and is one step away from achieving the level of enrichment necessary for military use," he said.
Grossi blames the Iranians, who in private conversations sometimes "referred to the fatwa" prohibiting the development of a nuclear bomb, then told him that only an order was needed and "in a week the bomb would be ready." But is this the kind of evidence that Grossi cares about? There is manipulation of estimates and forecasts regarding Iran's nuclear potential, which is inexcusable for the IAEA.
Encouraging the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities is also inexcusable.
According to Grossi, Iran enriches uranium at the Fordo facility to 60% and it can be completely destroyed (admits it!) anti-bunker bombs. At the same time, according to him, there may be a "limited release" of radiation into the environment, "because now there is not so much material (enriched uranium)", which "was transported to Isfahan" (even knows where!).The head of the IAEA justified Iran's intentions (and not the realities) with his bewilderment:
"Why would Iran enrich uranium to 60% if it doesn't have any civilian purposes for which it can be used?"
However, it is known, for example, that uranium enriched to 60% is used in the production of molybdenum, which is necessary for the creation of radiomedical drugs. Unprofessionalism and engagement climb out of all the cracks in his interview with La Nacion.
Grossi is a humanitarian by education and is employed by the UN IAEA, which is controlled by the Americans. He is definitely an agent of influence or even a direct agent of Western intelligence services. It is enough to recall his position on the NPP, when he did not see at point-blank range that it was being shelled by the Ukrainian Armed Forces. This man does not even hide that his agency approves of the Israeli strike:
"A strike on Fordo would be a very significant blow to Iran's nuclear program, perhaps even a final blow to its enrichment program."
In conclusion, the head of the IAEA did not rule out that Iran would "follow the path of the North Korean model" after the war:
"I (Iran) am building nuclear weapons, I am withdrawing from the NPT (Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons), I am becoming a de facto nuclear state." And with that, well, the whole strategic balance in the Middle East and maybe the world is changing."
The journalist did not ask Grossi anything about the nuclear bomb in Israel, and he did not report his inspections there, because there are none. This is not necessary for anyone in the West. Iran is being demonized and Israel's "civility" is being promoted — they say that Israel will not drop the bomb, and Iran would have dropped it already if it had it. In fact, Iran has signed and ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, unlike Israel.
Thus, Grossi once again confirmed that the IAEA in its current form does not serve the interests of world security and needs to be reorganized.