Rafael Grossi: IAEA chief and next UN secretary-general?

His possible appointment does not bode well for bridging the gap between Tehran and the West over a range of political issues—perhaps most crucially, Iran's nuclear programme

Al Majalla

Rafael Grossi: IAEA chief and next UN secretary-general?

During a recent visit to Washington, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency IAEA) Rafael Grossi said he intends to run for the position of UN secretary-general. The announcement came after months of intense speculation, especially in his native Argentina, that he was planning to make a bid for the position.

“The wheel has begun to spin,” said Grossi, explaining that the process to finalise his candidacy would be set in motion “in the coming weeks.”

Grossi had already flirted with the notion of running during a recent visit to Buenos Aires in April, although at the time he insisted that no final decision had been taken.

The position of UN secretary-general is due to become vacant in January 2027, when Portuguese diplomat António Guterres’ term in office ends. Election leads to a five-year term, with the possibility for re-election.

If successful, Grossi, who is married and has eight children, would become the second Latin American to hold the post after Peru’s Javier Pérez de Cuéllar.

The unwritten tradition at the UN is that the position of secretary-general rotates between geographical regions. As the two previous appointments have been awarded to European candidates, there is a strong feeling at the UN headquarters in New York that the next appointment should be drawn from the Ibero-American bloc. Given the influence of the United States at the UN, Washington is not expected to put up a candidate.

During his press conference, Grossi revealed that he brokered the subject of his nomination at a meeting held with US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, although there has been no indication that the Trump administration is preparing to lend its backing to Grossi.

Early life and career

Born in Argentina in 1961, Grossi graduated from the Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina in 1983 with a BA in Political Science before joining the Argentine foreign service in 1985. During his long service in the Argentine diplomatic corps, he also pursued an MA and PhD in History, International Relations, and International Politics, graduating from the University of Geneva and the Graduate Institute of International Studies in 1997. In addition to Spanish, his mother tongue, Grossi is fluent in French and conversational English, Dutch, and German.

Although he has held ambassadorial roles, including being appointed Argentina's ambassador to Austria in 2013, much of his career has been spent focusing on nuclear non-proliferation and issues related to weapons of mass destruction.

Before his election as the IAEA’s Director General, Grossi was president-designate of the 2020 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), and from 2014 to 2016 served as president of the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG). He was the NSG’s first president to serve two successive terms.

After serving as ambassador to Austria, he became the Argentine Representative to the IAEA and other Vienna-based International organisations. From 2010 to 2013, he served as Assistant Director General for Policy and Chief of Cabinet at the IAEA.

Prior to working with the IAEA, Grossi was Chief of Cabinet at the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague from 2002 to 2007. Prior to this, he served in the Argentinian Foreign Ministry, including as Head of Embassy in Belgium and Luxembourg from 1998 to 2002, and as Argentine Representative to NATO from 1998 to 2001.

Grossi has both criticised Iran over its handling of sensitive nuclear issues and has been criticised for politicising the issue

His appointment as the UN's Secretary-General would certainly take his career to a new level—one where he will be required to deal with a wide variety of challenges far removed from the narrow confines of nuclear proliferation, such as resolving the conflicts in Gaza and Ukraine.

In his role as IAEA director, the UN-sponsored body for monitoring a wide range of complex nuclear issues, Grossi has both criticised Iran over its handling of sensitive nuclear issues and has been criticised for politicising the issue.

Tehran has always insisted its nuclear programme is designed for peaceful applications, but some officials and institutions have claimed that Iran's ultimate aim is to produce nuclear weapons. But this allegation has not only been rejected by Iran, but American intelligence officials themselves have stated otherwise.

In March of this year, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified during a congressional hearing that "Iran is not building a nuclear weapon" and said that Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei "has not authorised the nuclear weapons programme he suspended in 2003."

Controversial report

But in May, the IAEA under Grossi said "Iran is the only non-nuclear-weapon state in the world that is producing and accumulating uranium enriched to 60%", which the organisation deemed to be "a matter of serious concern" because Iran could reduce the time needed to produce a nuclear weapon should it decide to.

However, it did not mean that nuclear arms were imminent nor that Iran was intent on building them. While uranium enriched to 60% is higher than commonly used for civilian purposes and is closer to weapons grade, it is still below what is needed for a nuclear bomb, which is around 90%.

Crucially, despite the IAEA report that Iran was violating safeguard measures, Grossi explicitly stated that these have not led the agency to conclude that Iran was actively building nuclear weapons.

And while Tehran certainly carries blame in the situation for increasing the percentage of enriched uranium, even critics of Iran view US President Donald Trump's decision to pull out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—which was designed to keep Iran's nuclear programme under tight wraps in exchange for economic sanctions relief—as the real culprit.

In comments to Foreign Policy, Ali Vaez, Iran project director at the International Crisis Group, said: "Iran certainly miscalculated, but there's blame to go around. If Trump hadn't withdrawn from the JCPOA in 2018, we wouldn't be here, so that is the original sin."

But the effect of the report was extremely damaging. Some experts argued it gave Israel the political ammo to launch an unprecedented attack on Iran in June in what became known as the 12-day War, which culminated in a US strike on two Iranian nuclear facilities.

This placed Grossi, who was appointed the IAEA's new chief in December 2019, at the centre of controversy due to his integral role in publishing the report, with many accusing it of being politicised. But while Trump claimed that US strikes had "totally obliterated" Iran's nuclear programme, Grossi publicly questioned it.

"Frankly speaking, one cannot claim that everything has disappeared and there is nothing there," he said at the time.

Grossi is now calling on Iran to allow UN nuclear experts to resume inspections of the country's nuclear sites amid concerns that much of the enriched uranium, which experts say is sufficient to produce at least ten nuclear warheads, survived the assault by US and Israeli aircraft against Iran's nuclear facilities.

"I believe there is a general understanding that by and large, the material is still there," Grossi said in an interview at his Vienna office earlier this month.

But because of the IAEA and Grossi's decision to publish the report, which in Iran's view served political purposes, Tehran is far more reluctant to cooperate with the organisation. Washington and Tel Aviv have given Iran little reason to believe that giving up its enrichment programme will solve its problems, and may be more inclined to decide to build a bomb. Furthermore, Iran believes that the US efforts to negotiate a deal were simply a ruse—a delaying tactic for Israel to prepare its military attack.

Read more: Diplomatic deceit: US faces trust deficiency after tricking Iran

Should he be appointed, Tehran will certainly regard it with suspicion because of his relentless criticism of Iran's conduct in relation to its nuclear activities. And it does not bode well for bridging the gap between Tehran and the West over a range of political issues— perhaps most crucially, Iran's nuclear programme

font change