US President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that recent strikes have fully destroyed Tehran’s nuclear infrastructure, while the head of the UN’s nuclear inspector has stated that Iran still has the potential to resume uranium enrichment within months.
In an interview aired on Sunday, Rafael Grossi, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), stated that although the U.S. raids on Iranian nuclear facilities resulted in “severe damage,” the program’s basic infrastructure remained intact.
“The capabilities they possess are present,” said Grossi. They can have several cascades of centrifuges operating and generating enriched uranium in a few months. It is impossible to say that everything has vanished.
His comments coincide with a broader discussion about the magnitude of the harm caused by US strikes that were launched earlier this month during a 12-day war between Israel and Iran. Israel’s surprise strike, which claimed to be an attempt to halt Iran’s purported development of nuclear weapons, marked the start of the conflict. Later, the United States joined the campaign and targeted three important Iranian nuclear installations.
The operation “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear program, as President Trump has asserted, but U.S. and international authorities have provided a more cautious assessment. While certain sites were damaged, a number of senators who spoke out on the issue admitted that the stated military goal was never to eliminate all nuclear stockpiles.
Grossi also called on Tehran to resume cooperation with the IAEA, whose access has been restricted since the strikes, and emphasized the necessity of fresh international oversight.
“We had good visibility into their declared facilities until recently,” he stated. However, several questions remained, including the existence of uranium traces at unreported locations, for which Iran has not offered convincing justifications.
Regarding uranium particles found at several sites outside of Iran’s officially announced nuclear program, the IAEA has long been looking for answers. Although Iran has not announced a nuclear weapons program, Grossi reaffirmed that there were significant concerns about its lack of transparency.
He explained, “We didn’t see a program aiming directly at weapons.” “But at the same time, they weren’t responding to some very important questions.”
According to Western diplomatic sources, the preliminary evaluations by US defense and intelligence agencies also implied that some enriched uranium might have been moved before the strikes, a possibility that Iranian officials hinted at in private correspondence. This has been officially refuted by President Trump, who maintains that no material was moved before the assaults.
Grossi stated that such a scenario could not be ruled out, but did not confirm whether anything had been transferred. “When a nation announces protective measures, it makes sense to assume that they might involve moving sensitive materials,” he said.
In the wake of the strikes, the head of the IAEA cautioned against becoming overconfident.
“This hourglass approach to dealing with weapons of mass destruction is not a good idea,” he added, cautioning that if political will permitted, Iran’s industrial and technological capabilities could be quickly reactivated.
Recent actions by Tehran to lessen its collaboration with foreign monitoring organizations are a sign of rising uneasiness and raise concerns about potential further escalation and the breakdown of oversight systems put in place under the 2015 nuclear agreement.
Grossi urged caution and diplomacy in his closing remarks. “Verification, transparency, and dialogue are the only sustainable ways forward in such sensitive areas,” he stated.
Washington officials have not yet formally addressed Grossi’s most recent comments. When questioned about the interview, a senior US official, however, reaffirmed the administration’s assessment that the strikes caused a great deal of damage. The official claimed that Iran’s nuclear program before and after the operation was completely different.
