Dr Patricia Lewis
[Pause] Are you ready? A warm welcome to you all, our members, friends at Chatham House, new people to Chatham House. We’ve been convening meetings for over a 100 years, and we’d like to thank you all for joining us in the continuation of that tradition. Before I start, I want to encourage you to tweet #CHEvents, @ChathamHouse, please, and to say that this is on the record and it’s being livestreamed. And I’m absolutely delighted to welcome you, Dr Grossi, Rafael if I may.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Thank you.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And Dr Grossi is the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the IAEA in Vienna, and he’s been there as Director General from the end of 2019.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Indeed.
Dr Patricia Lewis
When at that time, you were then President-Designate of the 2020 Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, the NPT, and unfortunately then had to hand that over to a colleague from the Argentinian Foreign Ministry and become the Director General. But you were, for a long time, also, an Ambassador to the IAEA, you were also President for the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and you also presided over the Diplomatic Conference on the Convention of Nuclear Safety. So, what I’m telling you is, that this man isn’t just a Diplomat who turned up at the IAEA one day, he’s somebody who really knows this stuff. You were obviously in Argentina, as Political Affairs Director General, as well, and you were also in The Hague at the OPCW, at the chemical weapons…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…institute. Not institute, but international organisation.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Organisation, yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And you were also Argentinian representative to NATO for a while.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, you’ve had a really amazing career in international organisations, in international peace and security issues, right at the cutting edge.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And you hold a PhD in International Relations from the University of Geneva, and you’ve got loads, I’m not going to read them all out, don’t worry, of honorary degrees and awards. So, you’re really welcome and it’s wonderful to have somebody with your experience here. I’m going to ask you a few questions.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And we’re going to get into a chat about those, and then after about 25/30 minutes, I will turn to our audience, both in the room and online, and we’d be really keen to have your questions. So, what I thought we’d begin with is the experience that you’ve had in Ukraine. You know, you’ve been in Ukraine quite recently and you went, first of all, to Chernobyl and then, to Zaporizhzhia, and I know that you brought safety experts on the invitation of President Zelenskyy, and at some significant risk to them and yourself.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, do you want to tell us about that and, you know, what’s going on there now and what’s most important, from your perspective?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, thank you. I think first of all, thank you very much for the opportunity to see you again. We’ve been working together in different ways for many, many years, so it’s great to have this opportunity to talk and to share with people here and those online, some of these experiences at these, you know, interesting times. Ukraine, since the beginning of the war, I’ve been there six times already, different parts of the country, including the occupied part, which is Zaporizhzhia, not on – the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, not the entire region, which is partly occupied.
So, I’ve been there doing different things, because from the very beginning of the war, we – I decided that the agency would be fully involved in trying to prevent a nuclear accident, and providing support as it might be needed in the different facilities of the country. So, since you are referring to – I mean, there are two important – every visit was every bit as important and every one marked some diff – some important phase in the conflict. For example, the first time in April last year I went to Chernobyl, it was because the Russians had just evacuated, and you may remember that there were all this talk – there was all this talk about elevated radiation levels and all that, so we went there.
Then of course, there were other visits, there was Zaporizhzhia, I’m going there with my teams, some of them here in the room, literally under fire for two kilometres or three kilometres, to get to the plant and leave what is now ISAMZ, the Assistance and Support Mission at Zaporizhzhia, which is still there, going through the sixth rotation. But last trip you are referring to, it was – it had two important objectives. The first was to set up permanent missions from the IAEA at – now at every single nuclear reactor and facility in the country.
So, we were crisscrossing the whole country, entering from the south, to what is called South Ukraine Nuclear Power Plant, not too far away from Kherson, and then up north to Rivne and Khmelnytskyi, then Chernobyl, and back to – so, at the moment, the IAEA flag is flying – is atop, and it’s not a figure of speech, we have the flag there, the – all of these facilities in Ukraine, which is quite unique. It is also an interesting point of evaluation and assessment in terms of the mission of the organisation, now and in future and, of course I was there to continue my conversations with President Zelenskyy on the establishment of a protection zone around the nuclear power plant. So, that was this last experience.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, this is an initiative of yours, this idea of a protection zone around nuclear power stations, nuclear reactors, in conflicts and, you know, a few weeks ago we hosted Comfort Ero, Dr Comfort Ero of Crisis Group, where she led us through the Ten Conflicts to Watch for 2023, and there were a number of countries mentioned in there that have nuclear reactors.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Right? So, this isn’t just about Ukraine, right, this initiative, this idea of yours to create protection zones?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, unfortunately, it’s not the first time that we have seen military action on nuclear reactors. You may remember Osirak.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yeah.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
You may remember Deir az-Zur…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yeah.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
…and other situations. Here, what we see is different, of course, because this is an active conflict, conventional conflict, ongoing, and a facility literally on the frontline. We are there, there’s Dnipro, then there is, this side of the river, Russian-controlled territory, on the other side is Ukrainian-controlled territory, so – or Ukraine proper, more than controlled. So, that, of course, makes it unique, and of course, they – what we have seen is that, wittingly or unwittingly, the weaponization of the nuclear facility has occurred. Hmmm, the facility has been shelled more than once. There is still active military operation in – near the plant, so the danger continues there and it’s incredibly high.
So, the need to protect the plant is there and we have a proposal, we have been working on it. As you can imagine, we have the – we have a big table, where – with people in green, as well. So, that makes it for a difficult conversation, not that the military themselves are difficult, but they have their own interest, which is to win. In the case of Ukraine, to regain the territory and the plant, in the case of the Russians, to conserve what they claim is theirs now. So, that makes it for a complicated operation when I come with an idea that implies, in different ways, restraint, which is not what any military official in a combat zone wants to hear. So, the – here, the challenge is to try to find the line of convergence where it will be not necessarily in a joint or agreed formula, but in an interest that both sides see as legitimate and worth pursuing through us.
Dr Patricia Lewis
I mean, there are already legal restraints on not attacking nuclear power stations.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Oh, yeah, of course, this is, yeah, a excellent point, because some people have been saying, “Well we need this, we need that.” Oh, no, everything is out there. There are many resolutions from the General Conference because of this previous…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Geneva Protocol, the Gen – the Geneva Conventions Protocol, also, yeah, yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Exactly, so you have all these restrictions on attacking nuclear infras – general infrastructure and nuclear infrastructure, even going back to the 1940s, which is amazing, but this existed. So, the issue here is that, for the first time, although there is precedent, these were pointed attacks on a – of a diff – completely different tide and type. Here you have an active war of conventional type, more like Second World War, with trenches and infantry and tanks, and all this kind of thing, heavy artillery. So, this makes it for a completely different configuration, with the risk factor at a much higher level, in our opinion, than in – on other places.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And we’ve been looking as well at cyberattacks on nuclear power stations.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And, you know, in the UN now there are moves to – there’s agreement among the group of governmental experts and member states…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…of no attacks on critical infrastructure, for example.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah. No, no, this is…
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, this could be extended.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
This is a very relevant point, of course, the cyber thing, and we’ve seen the cyber action on other theatres, like on Iran, for example, in the past, that that has happened, or there are allegations that that has happened. So, this – here we are talking about, you know, ammunition and ordnance, so it’s more brutal, direct and with immediate consequences, if it happens.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And the IAEA doesn’t have the actual mandate just to go in and help with safety in times of crisis.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, that depends…
Dr Patricia Lewis
You have to be invited, do you?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, this is the – you know, this is like a partition, like, you know, depending – I think the notes and the lyrics are there, it depends how you sing it, how you play it.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Okay.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Hmmm?
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yeah.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
So, I believe I have a responsibility to protect and to preserve nuclear safety in the world. Had – maybe had I asked before going to Zaporizhzhia, “Do I have the authority?” the answer would never come or would be, “No.” Now we are there, hmmm hmm?
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yes.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
So, this is the way I interpret my role, within, of course – we are not, you know, har – rush or frivolous or crazy, but within the remit of nuclear safety and security, we have a space to move. Of course, we do it eyes wide open, aware of the political circumstance, consulting, talking, convincing, exercising the role I suspect people created international organisations for, so it depends. I could have stayed in Vienna and tweet about the conflict and condemn, and say, “No, this cannot happen.” We chose to do something else and now we are all over Ukraine, which in a way, is creating, in itself, a political space for protection. Granted, I’m not there yet, I still need to get to the protection zone, but we are getting there, we are getting, we are getting there.
Dr Patricia Lewis
A nuclear accident in Ukraine, or an attack on a power station, would be pretty awful.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Much worse would be a nuclear weapon used, right? And we’ve seen threats of nuclear weapons come…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…rise up again in this conflict, quite shockingly. But since the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty came into force, the IAEA has been charged with safeguarding nuclear materials to prevent them in non-nuclear weapon states being transferred to the military side…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…of the equation.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And the IAEA has this special role, and I’m going to ask you about some of the key countries that we might look at in that case, but we’ve seen now the Review Conference for the NPT fail twice in a row, 2015, and the 2020…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…one, which actually only happened last year, thanks to COVID.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, you know, how do you view this, because, you know, your whole mandate for safeguards is based on that treaty? There are other treaties, of course, that deal with nuclear weapons and prohibitions, such as testing, such as the new Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, but you know, this is the central role that connects to you in that regard, and you must be very worried about the future of the treaty.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah, I am, but at the same time, let’s not forget one very important point, it is the reviews that are failing, it’s not the treaty.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Okay.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
I’m not banalising this. A review is very important because the review projects the views, the assessment, the evaluation of member states or state parties, because it’s a treaty, about the instrument, but the instrument is every bit as successful and even more necessary today as it was in 1968/1970, in every aspect. So, while we have to lament and regret that countries cannot see eye-to-eye, we also need to think that this is happening because of a variety of reasons and not because the provisions of the treaty are less relevant today than they were before. You may – and if you look at what – the reasons, alleged or not, imagined, of the failure of these diplomatic exercises, they are different in nature and they do not have to do directly with provisions of the treaty.
In 2020/2022, was the Ukraine issue, before it used to be Middle East and so, the base was projecting frustrations, conflict and current day international debates, conflicts and acrimony among states, much more than the substance of the treaty. So, while not saying, “Everything is okay, let’s meet again and have a review that fails again,” no. I – this erodes the treaty, this allows people who don’t like the treaty and don’t like non-proliferation to say that the instrument is obsolete and we need something else, etc., to thrive and to question the norm, but I think we have to put things in the right perspective. We need – and I think there was an excellent job carried out my – by my good friend Ambassador Zlauvinen, who tried, rightly, to get countries to success, but it was very difficult because of this situation.
So, I try to put things in perspective and not despair. I think we have to defend the NPT, and the NPT, we don’t defend it only at a Review Conference. The NPT we defend and sustain by our own policy actions, and there are some we are discussing here and some that have to do with current non-proliferation issues that are out there, and that are every bit and every – perhaps even more relevant, because if countries do not observe and comply with their treaty obligations, well they are weakening the treaty, perhaps much more than delegates in New York not coming to an agreement on a text which is put in front of them.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yeah, so – and I would agree with you, but I think, as well, outside that, there’s also the dropping down the agenda of arms control…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…and the bilateral arms control between Russia and the United States.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
I would bring that up, yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
I think as well that we have seen very, very slow, if any lately, action on nuclear disarmament, nuclear arms reduction.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Indeed, indeed.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And indeed, some real fears about proliferation, again.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, I’m going to now come to the JCPOA, Iran, the very special role of the IAEA in that process and in the monitoring. So…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, we…
Dr Patricia Lewis
…everyone wants to talk to you about that, I’m sure.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes, yes, indeed. Well, of course, you know, in this case we have the process, or the attempt to revive the JCPOA, which was a very intensive process lasting for a year and a half, more or less, which I should remind the audience that the agency is not a party to that – to this agreement. It’s – but it’s the guarantor, it’s the Inspector, so we are very close to it, we are consulted constantly, so we are looming, if you want, over the negotiating table with them. So, this process is at a very complicated place at the moment, some say it’s over, some say it’s dead, some say it’s for those around the table to declare it dead or alive, so I don’t have a view on that. We are ready to perform the role that they would give to us.
But I should say that because of the deterioration in the interrelationship between, or among, the parties, of course, Iran decided to cease compliance with a number of obligations, nuclear obligations, that they had as a result of that agreement. And I’m not disputing the reasons, I’m just trying to describe that they decided to stop this. The moment they stopped this, they gradually started to shut down the visibility of the agency on a number of things which are very, very important. So, what I have been saying is that it is very difficult and it will be very difficult, I’m not saying impossible, but it will be very difficult to restore the complete picture of what we have in the Islamic Republic in terms of their nuclear infrastructure.
I should say that we are there, we are inspecting, because there is a Safeguards Agreement which is still in place, not without some problems, not without some problems as well, but the agency is present there, although with a restricted or more limited visibility on what is going on. So, our disposition is always to look for solutions, to look for diplomatic solutions, to look for openings, and this is what I’m trying to do, but at this point, both the JCPOA channel or the bilateral channel with Iran is not at its best point, I must say. I hope to be able to reset, restore, reinforce that indispensable dialogue. Without that, things are going to get worse.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yes, and you make regular reports in Vienna.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
You hold press conferences.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
You talk about this a lot. I mean, you must be very concerned as to what might happen if this whole process does collapse.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, it…
Dr Patricia Lewis
I mean is there a possibility of a different ones setting out? Is – you know, and apart from the worries that you have about the gaps in knowledge, which will be very hard to fill, but also, what will happen in the political process and what will be the impact on countries around Iran if that’s the case? What sort of decisions might they make? Great concerns about, sort of, pre-emptive action or other proliferation, and might it have impacts in that regard in other parts of the world? Could this particular problem that we’re having in re-establishing this process, sort of, have a much greater impact than just in this case?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, yeah, that’s my impression. Of course, the Middle East has a unique set of problems that will be – all of them will be aggravated if we fail, and I – when I say ‘we’, it’s a collective we, because it’s us, it’s Iran and it’s the rest, in trying to help us get to a better place from where we are now. I don’t see it in anybody’s interest that there will be proliferation there. I think we would be really aggravating, in a incommensurable way, the already fragile situation there. We’re not there yet, but we cannot really afford to fail, and this is where the role of the IAEA, but not only our role, our ability to do what we are supposed to do, is so crucial.
Without that, without the IAEA being able to tell to the world that the programme – that the nuclear programme in Iran is completely in peaceful uses, then there will be this instability, and this is why I think it is in the interest of the Islamic Republic, in the interest of the IAEA and everybody’s interest, that we can work well, unimpeded. The IAEA does not have any political – you know, sometimes people say, “They are politicising.” We’re not politicising anything. If I wanted to politicise this, believe you me, I could do it. We are constantly opening doors, constantly looking for another solution, another opportunity, and this is what I want, and this is what I hope will happen. I do hope I’ll be able to, as I was saying, to reset this dialogue, which is, if not broken, in a very, I would say, fragile place at this point.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, I’m going to whirlwind you over to the other side of the world, to Australia. We have the AUKUS initiative that came from Australia, the UK and United States, with this all new suite of new technologies, new ways of doing defence in the Indo-Pacific and between the three countries. But at the heart of it, of course, was a very controversial decision for Australia to move away from a diesel-powered submarine to a nuclear-powered…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…submarine. And, you know, one of the things that people have been very critical about is the worry that they have about the proliferation aspects of this, and I know that Australia and the US and the UK have made it very clear that they will, and have been, working with the IAEA to find a proliferation-resistant solution. Would that be the right phrase to use? In a way that military power, nuclear power for the military, cannot then be transferred from that military role into a military role for nuclear weapons. So, it’s that material…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Hmmm hmm. Hmmm hmm.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, you have been in discussion, I know they’re very sensitive, but can you give us…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well…
Dr Patricia Lewis
…any idea of how they’ve been going and what’s likely to come out?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Many things about this. The – it’s a very complex issue in the sense that it has many aspects, the legal aspects, the technical aspects. I’m not getting into the political, although we can mention it, because, of course, is what informs everything that happens. This is what triggers opposition and – so, from the beginning, we have to be reminded that the possibility of having nuclear naval propulsion has existed and when countries drafted their Safeguards Agreements, they have in mind this already. Talking about 40 years ago or more, right? So, there is – I don’t want to get too technical or too boring or too legalistic here, but there are some – there is some language there to say that if countries decided to go for certain projects that would imply that certain material would be withdrawn from inspections, because when a submarine is moving around, the Inspectors, unless they are – huh?
Dr Patricia Lewis
Just imagining it now and I’m…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
“No, it’s over there,” I guess the Indo-Pacific, as they call it now, is there. So, the idea is that this material is out of inspection control, hence this idea that if you want to do that you have to enter into a special arrangement with the IAEA to make sure that there is a technical solution to that, to make sure that not a single gram of the nuclear material which is inside the fuel that is in the reactor propelling the boat, is going to be diverted to anything else. So, it’s a very complex operation because in any other nuclear facility, we go, we have our routine inspections, we do the material balance, the accounting, and everything is fine.
Here, you have – and, you know, what, for those in the room who – and this is a very distinguished audience, an expert audience, the interest of nuclear submarines is that they can stay in the water for a long time, yeah, undetected and so on, so forth. So – but we want to detect nuclear material always of course so you have to find a way around that. So, this to say that this was in the menu, this was in the menu, but nobody was asking for this dish for many years, from the beginning. Not that others had thought about it.
Dr Patricia Lewis
They have flirted with it.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes. Canada, for example, had this idea, then they decided to not pursue it there were some political discussions etc., so that’s part of history, but then, this – so, what I need to say is that we are prepared to work with these countries. We are aware that for some countries, in particular China, they have a different view, they see this as a proliferation prone project. We are saying this is within the legal framework, we are not endorsing anybody’s project or anybody’s military objectives or goals, it’s not my role. My role is to make sure there is – out of this thing there is no proliferation, and in this case there are three and there is one that is a non-nuclear weapon state, which is Australia, alright? The two others proliferated a long time ago.
Dr Patricia Lewis
A while ago, yeah.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
And they are within the NPT regime and, of course, including Article VI and the compromise and the commitment to this regard one day, they are – their nuclear weapons are part of the landscape, right? It’s not the case for Australia. This is why this is so technically and politically challenging. We are working with the countries, we need to wait until, as you know, there is – they set to themselves a period of 18 months until they announce what kind of model they will have. It’s going to be built in, it’s got – will it be also partly manufactured in Australia or not, or received? So, all of that has a big influence, because it – from that, it will depend the kind of safeguards approaches, inspection system, that we propose.
But this is the beginning of a relatively long, I would say, road, and we should not forget that once this special arrangement – if and when the IAEA and the three AUKUS partners agree on a special arrangement that would ensure that there is no diversion of nuclear material, then this has to be reported to the Board of Governors of the IAEA, so there is transparency about what is being agreed. But granted, it’s a game changer. Some say that other countries are going to – it’s not the only country. Brazil, for example, has already invoked this possibility. The model in the case of Brazil is different, because Brazil is producing it indigenously, it’s their own boat, it’s their own reactor, it’s its own nuclear material. In this case, there is a transfer, which adds to the complexity of the thing. I hope – it’s understandable, but…
Dr Patricia Lewis
You’ll get some practice with Australia, so…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yes. So, I’ve got three questions and then, I’ve got to turn to the audience. So, I’m going to give you some quick-fire questions, right.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, DPRK, North Korea, is there any hope?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes, there’s always hope.
Dr Patricia Lewis
That’s it, that’s the answer.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
There’s always hope, and I – let me say something. The difficulty we have here is, of course, that because of all these geopolitical tensions that have come and that are now – perhaps and are going to be with us for some time – I was in Seoul a few weeks ago and I had a very good conversation with President Yoon about this, I believe there is a – there is potentially an increased role for the IAEA in this. Because unfortunately we’ve lost these platforms that used to exist, like the six-party talks and things like that where the P5 plus others were able to sit together around the table on a – with a common objective. Unfortunately, the current circumstances make it a bit more difficult that they might agree to work together on this thing, so I am persuaded that the IAEA can play a useful role in the future.
Dr Patricia Lewis
That’s good to hear. Very quickly, nuclear energy, generally. Very important in the mix for carbon reduction, right?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
But people are still fearful of nuclear energy. Can you give any reason why they should reduce those fears?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, it’s a fundamental matter. Let’s say, nuclear energy is already playing a big role. Some believe that it could play a role. At the moment, at the moment nuclear energy is producing 25% of the clean energy in the world, hmmm hmm, the clean energy that is there. From all the energy in the world, 25% of clean energy is nuclear, and in Europe 50%. Again, people, because they follow perhaps Germany and what – the debates in Germany, they forget that there are more than 100 nuclear reactors in Europe. This country is taking – today is an important day. They have a new architecture and there is a Ministry for Energy Security and Zero. Well…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Net Zero, yeah, problems, yeah.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
If you needed to understand anything, the two things are in that name, is energy security is net zero. Without nuclear, you don’t get it. So, we are not saying we have to nuclearize the world, we are not saying that; we are not a nuclear lobby. We are saying nuclear, as a good baseline clean energy, has a place in an intelligent nuclear mix, and this is what we are doing, we’re working intensely on new nuclear and small modular reactors, on big projects, as well. I’m really looking forward, tomorrow I’m heading to Hinkley, which is an EPR, big, big, big, old-style, new reactor, but old type of – so, to power great economies you still need it and so, we see a lot of that.
For example, now we are present at every COP, for example. A few years ago, the presence of a Director General of the IAEA at a COP would’ve been a dangerous operation for the DG that would have liked to go there, not a very friendly place for – but now the discussion – the young generation sees things completely different. The environmental discussion, science-based, not ideology-based, the – and the science-based environmental discussion cannot deny that there is a role for nuclear energy. It’s not for all, maybe, but for those who will use it, it is very efficient.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And talking of efficiency, this is not a question, but this is to say that the IAEA does this on a total budget of 670 million per year, right? And that is, by all calculations that I’ve read, less than what Russia is spending per day on the war against Ukraine, but I also want to point out, in your honour, that it is exactly what Lionel Messi earned at Barcelona in four years.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, you know…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Was he paid enough?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, you know, I don’t think he is paid enough. I think whatever he asks is okay, so – yeah, I’m being very objective here, I believe, so, he brings happiness to millions.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Basically, so does he…?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
And not only the Argentines. This is the first World Cup where people wanted not only a country but a person to win. I was there, I’m still wearing, you know, this – unforgettable thing, yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, I think he should join forces with the IAEA and, you know…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, I hope maybe I can convince him to do something…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yeah, absolutely.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
…for us.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yeah, you heard it first here. Okay, so I’m going to now turn to the audience, and what I’d like you to do is raise your hands. If the microphone comes to you, could you please say your name and if you’re associated with an institute, other than Chatham House, please say so. And then, I will also go to our online audience, which we have many people at the moment. So, I want to go to this lady over here, please, thank you.
Simona Leskovar
Thank you very much. My name is Simona Leskovar. I’m Slovenian Ambassador here, and Director General, we met where you were the Ambassador of Argentina to Slovenia and I was the Deputy Foreign Minister a few years ago.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes, how are you?
Simona Leskovar
It’s good to see you in London.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Thank you.
Simona Leskovar
If I may ask about Iran and JCPOA, and you mentioned that tour and you – we talked about the efforts to revive the Iranian nuclear deal have been stalled and that Tehran is closer than ever to have nuclear weapons. So – and as their programme is advancing, US and Israel might think that a large-scale military action is the only option to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapon. If I may ask, you said that you are not political and I understand, but still, I would push it as an Ambassador, a little bit this button, what would be your advice to Europe, to Europeans, about the new strategy and to secure a, kind of, JCPOA-minus agreement?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, thank you, Ambassador, it’s great to see you again. I would say, first of all, it is important to bear in mind that Iran does not have nuclear weapons. It – what Iran is accumulating is enough material to have them, it’s not irrelevant, but it’s not the same thing. Sometimes people, you know, put the two things together too quickly. I think it is important in the case of – Europe has been a very strong advocate of JCPOA. Of course, the geostrategic factors are weighing because it’s not so far away and the Middle East consideration that we were mentioning is very important.
I think in the case of Europe, it is very important that they continue to support us in trying to find a viable way forward, JCPOA or no JCPOA. JCPOA is a political agreement and for as long as those who are inside it, or are advocating it, want it, it is perfect, but there was an Iran before the JCPOA and there will be an Iran after the JCPOA, if the JCPOA is not revived. What we need to make sure is that we have the necessary elements to make sure that there is no proliferation, that this programme does not cross a line, and that might be through something like the JCPOA or something else. In this I’m – on this, I’m neutral. We can provide the monitoring elements to have, or to help, Iran give the assurances they say they want to give to the world that there is no deviation of nuclear material.
So, I wouldn’t despair, in the sense that if the JCPOA cannot be revived, it’s – again, I’m not saying yes, JCPOA, no JCPOA. The important thing is that to keep the non-proliferation rule strongly in place, and so, we will see. I think the next few weeks and months will be crucial to determine whether there is a possibility. Some others are talking about even a prolonged period, where something like the JCPOA itself, or something similar, could be re-enacted or brought back to life. It can be done, but of course, the – it is the gap that worries me at this point in time, because we are losing the fli – the visibility and the programme continues to grow, and this is why I need to go to Tehran, we need to talk, and we need to do it soon.
Dr Patricia Lewis
I’ve got lots of hands going up, so I’m going to take a few together. I’ve got one, two, and then three here, so if I could have the microphone here, and if I could ask you to be brief, please, and introduce yourself.
Hadi Naderi
Hello Gigi, this is Hadi Naderi from IRNA News Agency.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Hello.
Hadi Naderi
So, the question actually is that your confidential reports to the Board of Governors, it’s been routinely leaked to the Western media. So, I just wanted to know whether – if that concerns you, if you have taken any steps, or you’re just fine with it. And in your last report you’ve, basically, said during an unannounced inspection at Fordo there was a change of enrichment setup. Iran says that they already, basically, made clarification, it was due to a human error and the issue was resolved, but could you elaborate this for us, please?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah.
Hadi Naderi
Thank you.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
First – thank you very much for the question. First, on the issue of leaking, you know, we – you should ask to those who leak. I mean, the IAEA produce a report and if somebody leaks it, what can I do? I mean, there are very…
Dr Patricia Lewis
We have the Chatham House Rule, you know, we do things to people.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Let me just tell you, we do things to people.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
There are, you know, there are very stringent measures as – to protect these confidential reports. The member states have them, not everybody has access to these reports. So, of course, it’s a matter of concern, but there is – I don’t have a police force or a confidentiality, you know, commando to make sure that these things – it’s impossible, and we know that we live at a time where it is rather, I would say, challenging to control the flow of information. But we are concerned, we produce these reports for our member states, what happens after that can be regrettable.
But – and moving to what you mentioned, I think the report described what happened, and we have communicated to Iran. We are in constant contact with the technical – with the AEOI and with the operators. They know what happened. It shouldn’t have happened. We have a conversation and we are going to be adapting our verification regime to this chan – the issue – I mean, there are two issues here. First, that there has been a modification that should have been reported. That is one issue, that happened, you cannot go back and right this wrong, but the other thing is that, of course, with this modification, the facility has new capabilities, so we have to inspect more. That is the – so, this is the process.
Jonathan Paris
Jonathan Paris, I’m a Senior Advisor with the Chertoff Group. My question is about the new geopolitical realities of Russia and Iran working in increasingly close partnership. The latest report is that Iran is going to construct a factory in Russia to produce 6,000 drones. I don’t know how and in what timeline. What does this mean with Russia’s continuing – does Russia have an ability to obstruct your work on Iran, on the Iran nuclear pile? Number one. Number two, are you concerned about what the quid pro quo – what Russia might give to Iran in terms of technology, in exchange for all this drone work that Iran is providing? And I guess, I mean overall, how are we going to deal with this increased complexity when Russia and Iran are increasingly working together?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, thank you.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Before you answer that, Rafael, I want to go to – over here.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes, it’s…
Dr Patricia Lewis
…to…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Thank you very much.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Just so we can be done with…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah, sure.
Orysia Lutsevych
I’m Orysia Lutsevych. I’m the Head of Ukraine Forum here at Chatham House. Thank you very much for your presence in Ukraine, it’s so critical, and I wanted to ask you whether you report any difficulty with electricity supply to current nuclear power stations through Russia’s determined destruction of electricity, both generation and the transition network. What is the status of that? Thank you very much.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Thank you. So first, thank you very much for the question. I – 100% with you on the fact that the new geopolitical realities are making our job much more difficult. this is one – we have to adapt to whatever circumstances. On other parts of your question, of course, Russia does not have any ability to obstruct or to prevent our work in Iran. Our work in Iran is a bilateral thing, it’s us and Iran. Iran is an MT – NPT member state and a state that has subscribed a comprehensive Safeguards Agreement, and whatever happens between us and Iran, we tell it to Iran as – and the member states, because it’s the rule of the Board of Governors, what should be happening. So, there’s no intervention of a third party here.
The other aspects that you’re mentioning are relevant, but it’s a bit of speculation, which is not directly related to the nuclear programme in Iran. But at the same time, to say that by virtue of our very intensive – my Iranian counterparts like to say, especially when they criticise me, that my presence there is extraordinary and they are the most inspected country in the world, but because of this reason, anything that happens in terms of technologies and developments, we would be able to see immediately. So – but that wouldn’t happen. Russia is within the NPT, and I cannot imagine that they would violate the NPT in such a blatant way.
Then on the question on the infrastructure. Indeed, it’s a very relevant question, because your first question was about Ukraine and, of course, we are imagining the kinetic accident when you hit a nuclear power plant and it goes boom. There is another pervasive and perhaps even more dangerous way to create a nuclear accident when you interrupt the outside power supply, which means that the cooling function of a…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Like Fukushima.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
…exactly, of a nuclear reactor stops, and then you have a meltdown, and actually this has happened, not meltdown, thank God, but repeatedly, not only in Zaporizhzhia, but in other – at least, in September, I think there was a general blackout, do you remember, after one of the raids, where all the facilities were operating and were being cooled through emergency diesel generators, and we have that repeatedly in Zaporizhzhia. So, how mindboggling is that that you have, for example, the largest nuclear power plant in Europe being cooled with diesel generators? So, this is why it is so crucial that you have means to protect the facilities. By the way, the presence of our Inspectors and experts in other facilities is more connected with this general perception of threat over the entire fleet on top of Zaporizhzhia.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Actually I wanted to just – we’ve got a couple of people online who can’t – they can’t ask the question, but one of them, Trisha de Borchgrave, asks, you know, “There’s lots of thing – environments that are potentially fragile,” such as we saw with the tsunami at Fukushima, we know because of climate change there may be more environmental vulnerabilities etc, and she’s worrying about the accidents that may occur with nuclear power and how to address those. And then Anna Davidson has asked about the “occupation of a nuclear power plant, rather than attack,” isn’t this a unique situation? It’s a bit different, right?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, it’s completely unique, it’s completely unique, because you have a situation where you have a nuclear power plant which is in occupied territory, under the control of a foreign power, but still operated by the Ukrainian workforce. So, this creates a unique situation with a potential for disagreement, a potential for – so this is why our presence there, the mere fact that you have a group of IAEA experts, has a very, I would say, favourable, positive influence in the whole situation, because they are not there as mediators of any sort, but the fact that they are there is incredibly influential and benign in this sense.
So – but yes, it’s very challenging. The issues related to the staff, the welfare of the staff, the situations that were there, have been – is part of what I call the “seven pillars of nuclear safety,” one of which is the staff and the ability of the staff to perform its functions without undue pressure etc., etc., so that is quite unique. The other question about accidents, which they of course – nuclear, as any other infrastructure, is not accident-free, but when you look at 70 years of commercial nuclear operation, the safety record of nuclear industry is incredibly strong.
Dr Patricia Lewis
It’s one of the strongest in the world, right?
Rafael Mariano Grossi
It’s – absolutely, by any metric.
Dr Patricia Lewis
‘Cause everyone’s so scared, they do everything properly.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
No, I mean…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Apart from once or twice.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, of course, there were two major accidents, I mean three, but two major accidents in 70 years, and that says it all. Of course safety come first. This is why you have places like the IAEA, who make sure that there is a minimum common denominator. You know, here you have a very – in the UK you have a very strong regulator, or in the United States and other places, but in other places it’s not so – it’s not the case. So, they look at the IAEA for this common – minimum common denominator of safety for the operations.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And with all industry there will be accidents, of course. Right, so I – the gentleman at the back has been very patient. Please, thank you.
Bob
Bob [inaudible – 55:00], I’m a member of Chatham House. Thank you very much for your speech tonight, but I believe that IAEA gives a false feeling of security with a lot of people, especially about Iran. As you mentioned, you have a very low budget, at the same time Iran is a very large country. Iran regime is a country which is – are experts in deceiving others and yet, you have couple of cameras, couple of inspections, and you believe you control the Iranian nuclear programme. And also the comment you made tonight, you said Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons. Now, you don’t know about that because you are not in a position to inspect every site in Iran, so I wonder why you intend to give those false feeling of security to the public.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Thank you and then, over in the centre, there’s two people here. Yes, thank you, thank you, and then at the end, afterwards, please, yeah.
Ugarak Kush
I’m Ugarak Kush, member. My question is, when we are going to see the nuclear fusion reactors. They always say next ten years, but when is the ten years?
Dr Patricia Lewis
No, they say five years every time.
Ugarak Kush
Oh.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And there’s a question online about this as well, so thank you very much, indeed, and then, the final question, at the end, there.
Sarah McFarlane
Sarah McFarlane from Thomson Reuters. I just wanted to ask you how the situation at the Zaporizhzhia power plant is influencing discussions around new nuclear power plants, and secondly, whether the IEA thinks that additional safety measures need to be introduced now that we’ve seen this unprecedented situation, and what those measures could be. What’s under consideration, whether you might revise your documents on physical protection of nuclear material and power plants? Thank you.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah, okay. Can we…?
Dr Patricia Lewis
Yeah.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
So, three…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Three, sorry.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
…very, very relevant, very, very, very interesting questions. No, we are not projecting a false say – feeling of security. The IAEA knows very well the nuclear facilities in Iran. Of course, there may be limitations at the moment. We don’t have a couple of cameras and a couple of Inspectors, we have much more than that, I can assure you. We are there every day and we are inspecting all the declared facilities, so without – and every time there is a doubt, every time there is something that we are not clear about, by virtue of our authority and competence, we are able to say it to the world, to say it to Iran, and to increase the level of inspection in some cases, like this that I have just described, and the gentleman from the Iranian News Agency was putting.
So, again, we don’t have the levels that I think are necessary, but we do have a good visibility on the facilities that we inspect. There are issues there, there are unanswered questions there, granted, but it’s not like we are, as you wrongly say, projecting a false sense of security in the case of Iran. Of course, we need to do more, we are doing it, we have a pretty good idea of what is going on in the Islamic Republic.
Second question was on fusion. Fusion is, of course, very important, some say it’s the energy of the future, and it will always be, but I don’t think so. This year there was an interesting announcement. As you’re following, I suppose, fusion, you know that in the United States there has been an experiment that could extract more energy than it was necessary to create it. I don’t want to get into plasma physics, ‘cause it would be a bit hurried, but there is movement. By the way, as they would say, stay tuned, but – because in London in October we are going to have a big fusion conference, sponsored by the IAEA and the United Kingdom, where we are going to provide a state of the art – an update in general of what is going on in the world on fusion. I think the trend is positive, it’s – as you know, we are able to get fusion. It’s a matter of stability and getting a controlled reaction like we do with fission. That is what we cannot do yet in fusion. It’s promising. Before fusion, there will be new nuclear in the fission type, and this is going to be the modularity, the small reactors and things like that. So, I think the future looks extremely positive for nuclear, this is without a doubt, for me.
Reuters lady, the issue of – and I think you mentioned that, in a way, when we were talking about the security and the safety of that – we – indeed we are constantly reviewing. You know that apart from our own judgment, in the IAEA, we have committees on safety standards where we meet with the regulators. We have constant exchanges with the regulators. We are looking at the safety standards, the security guidance, all the different documents that are necessarily – are necessary to ensure safety. I think, of course, after an event of this type, there will be some finetuning and review. We don’t see a fundamental need there. There’s nothing happening there that is not covered by the – including the issue of attack, sabotage.
I mean, what we are seeing now is that many of the things that regulators have been thinking about for many, many years, even when things like what we are seeing now in Zaporizhzhia would be – or would cause – would be considered as extremely, extremely creative, they were covered. So, we think it’s a matter of implementation. We do have the elements there, the normative elements, to do what is necessary. This is why the beginning of the war, we distilled them into these seven pillars, you know, the physical integrity, the staffing issues, the outside power, the monitoring abilities, the supply chain, and the seven basic things that you must have, and they are all related to safety standards and security standards.
So, let me say, that when I have my negotiations with Ukraine and with Russia on the safety zone and the security zone, we base everything we propose on the standards and the security guidance. So, it is not like we are improvising here, we are putting to good use whatever is there in the normative structures and saying, “How about adapting this and that to protect the planet?”
Dr Patricia Lewis
Have you got two minutes to take…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Sure.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…two questions online? And I’ll take one last…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
With pleasure.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…question from the…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
With pleasure.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…floor, which would be this…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
With pleasure.
Dr Patricia Lewis
…young man in the white jumper, but let me go first online. Julius Kaliisa. You should have a voice come through.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yeah.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Unmute yourself. Oh. Okay, can you unmute yourself, Julius?
Julius Kaliisa
Yes, thank you very much, sir. My name is Julius. I’m a graduate student at the University of Oxford. I’m from Africa, and my question is about why do we see the absence of the Western partnership and support for nuclear power in Africa, and why is the West leaving the space to Russian and Chinese partners? So, like, for example, we have over 16 countries in Africa signing partnership with Russia for nuclear power involvement. Why is the West in that regard reluctant to invoke co-operation with Africa? Thank you.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Thanks, Julius, and I’ve got Frank Domoney also asking a related question about reproaching the licencing of Chinese-designed reactors that they sell cheaply in Africa, and how concerned should we be about that? And then the final question, please, in the room, before we all have to close up.
Yaroslav
Thank you. My name is Yaroslav. I am working in international development and also expert on the – in electricity market. My question would be on Russia’s presence in Ukraine. What do you think of – if Russia connects the Zaporizhzhia NPP to Rosatom and Russia’s overall electricity system, what do you think will be consequences, technically and politically? And if that is going to happen, what would be the steps taken by your organisation and do you envision any sanctions also on Rosatom, if at all? Thanks.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Great, and I have one final question.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Yes.
Dr Patricia Lewis
So, I know that the IAEA puts in a lot of effort into recruiting young people. So, I wondered if you could just say a few words about the sort of opportunities that there are for young people in Vienna at your agency and treat this as a recruitment exercise right now.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Excellent, yes, yes, why not? So, the first was about the market and what the West does, and of course, you know, what I can say is this. We should maybe think about this issue outside of the war thing and the geopolitical thing. So, when you talk about nuclear energy, you’re talking about a commercial endeavour, commercial operation, and which – for which the financing conditions are fundamental. Nuclear projects, at least when it comes to traditional reactors, are pretty expensive, capital intensive, as we would say, at least in the beginning, and so they require considerable financing.
So, here we see that different models, different financing models, are being – are proposed, and what we have seen in the market is that perhaps it is easier for economies like China or Russia to offer financing conditions that are easier to absorb – be absorbed than other suppliers. This, I would say, is changing now. We see – and I’m not taking this from a political angle, just observing the market, we see more action from a number of Western-based companies in Eastern Europe, for example. This is very, very clear, yeah, and in other parts of the world, as well.
So, I don’t think – I sense a little bit, maybe I’m wrong, and I’m sorry if that is the case, I sense from the question, like, a geopolitical angle to the question. Why is the West allowing other countries to occupy the market? And that’s not the way a nuclear market, or any other market, operates. So, that is an important consideration. But that was the one question. The other was…
Dr Patricia Lewis
There was a similar one, but about the concern about standards, essentially, and Chinese-designed reactors in Africa.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Oh yes, the – you know, here I would say the – that the licencing processes, when it – you – we should remember that China, with the exception of the reactors that it has exported to Pakistan, has not exported to other countries yet. They have signed an agreement with Argentina, for example, but they haven’t – they are not there yet, but the licencing process is a process that involves the receiving country as well. It is an extremely meticulous exercise, and the safety of the Chinese nuclear reactors is also subject to our peer reviews and our controls, and I would say there is no issue with the safety of nuclear – Chinese nuclear reactors, if the intention of the question is to say that perhaps these reactors are less safe than others. Sorry, it’s not the case.
Of course, safety is a permanent exercise. You are never okay, you have to always be proving and observing all the safety. And one should be reminded that for China, nuclear is also very important in terms of their own very challenging CO2 or decarbonisation effort, because it’s a highly carbonised, one of the highest in the world, and China is betting a lot on nuclear energy, and they don’t want to have accidents in their own country, as you can imagine, so it is a very clear, I think, situation. There was…
Dr Patricia Lewis
Final question was on Ukraine again, and the connection to the Russian…
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Well, we haven’t seen that. First of all, the issue of sanctions, the IAEA is not in a capacity to apply sanctions to anybody. Sanctions are applied by countries. You see – you’ve seen lots of sanctions from Europe, from the United States, but interestingly, the nuclear issue has been rather exempted from that. Why is this? It’s because of the extensive presence of Rosatom, even in the West, in EU countries, or in Turkey, which is a NATO country, in Egypt, in many parts of the world. So, I think here, countries and decision-makers are thinking long and hard in terms of the pros and cons of imposing sanctions on projects that were ongoing from before the war, to the present.
There have been countries, like Finland, for example, that decided to cut ties with – at a significant cost, will be, I’m sure, because there will be challenges in court about that. So, the whole issue of sanctions, as you know very well, it is incredibly complex, there are primary sanctions, secondary sanctions, and this is being debated. I was in Brussels few days ago and this is a matter that is being discussed there. We don’t see that happening now.
Dr Patricia Lewis
And my final question was about careers in the agency.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
The – sorry?
Dr Patricia Lewis
On careers for young people in the agency.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
On careers, yes, absolutely. Nuclear is in a incredibly exciting phase, time. There is for the first time in generations – I’ve been working in this area for almost 40 years now, I have never seen a moment where stars are aligned in such a way where you have countries really wanting to increase their nuclear activity, wanting to – and seeing the nuclear activity as something that is really helpful in their decarbonisation efforts.
What this means is that there are incredible opportunities, and I’m not talking about the IAEA. The IAEA is the nuclear watchdog, the global hub, the promoter of many things, but in countries we see that – you know, it happens to be – to be able to talk to audiences like this, and increasingly, in universities and in places like that where there is – there are vocations now, people interested, and importantly, with a very clear idea of gender diversity. Having more women in nuclear, it is essential, and of course, as a result of that the IAEA becomes an even more interesting place to work, bearing in mind that we do this – we have this incredible variety of things.
Because today, in this conversation, we have been talking about the IAEA as a force for – to prevent conflict, to prevent war, to make the world more safe and secure. But we should never forget that out of the 175 countries that are part of this, it’s – the vast majority is not in there for the non-proliferation, is there for radiotherapy, nuclear medicine, water management, intelligent agriculture with radioisotopic techniques, many things that people – and I – perhaps I may imagine that some of you didn’t know that the IAEA was doing – we were helping the COVID-19 crisis, more than 130 countries receiving RT-PCRs are nuclear.
So, we were doing all this, we have launched something that’s called Rays Of Hope to bring radiotherapy to Africa, where more than half of countries do not have one single radiotherapy unit, and people die of cancers that are absolutely curable and preventable here in Europe. It’s a scandal, and the IAEA is doing a lot. So, it is a great place to work, but I would say, above and beyond the IAEA, it’s a great time for Atoms for Peace and Development.
Dr Patricia Lewis
What a great note to end, thank you so much, Rafael.
Rafael Mariano Grossi
Thank you very much.
Dr Patricia Lewis
Really…
