UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi called on Iran on Monday to “re-engage” with the agency so inspections can resume at sites the US and Israel bombed a year ago, as Washington led a push for a resolution to that effect at the agency's board. Iran still has not informed the International Atomic Energy Agency of what happened to those bombed nuclear sites or the nuclear material, including uranium enriched to near bomb grade, that was stored there. While the bombings destroyed or badly damaged uranium-enrichment facilities, much of the highly enriched uranium, including some enriched to up to 60%, a short step from the roughly 90% of weapons grade, is thought to have survived. “It's very important that we re-engage,” Grossi told the IAEA's 35-nation Board of Governors on the first day of a quarterly meeting. “I call on Iran to engage the Agency constructively in order to facilitate the full and effective implementation of safeguards in Iran,” he added in a separate, written statement to the board, using a term that encompasses inspections. The IAEA has conducted inspections at sites that were not bombed, but it halted those on safety grounds in February because of renewed military strikes, and has since only inspected Iran's operating power plant at Bushehr. “I have sporadic contacts with the foreign minister and others, but basically the channel of communication is broken,” Grossi told a press conference after he addressed the board. Later on Monday, the US, Britain, France and Germany submitted a draft resolution to the board for it to vote on later this week. The text, seen by Reuters, orders Iran to provide “complete information” on the enriched uranium and grant the IAEA all the access it needs to verify it “without delay.” While diplomats said the resolution was likely to pass by a clear margin, as a similar one did in November, it risked complicating talks between the US and Iran aimed at extending their ceasefire and paving the way for wider talks on issues including Iran's nuclear program. Grossi’s calls came as the US is lobbying other countries on the UN nuclear watchdog's Board of Governors to back a draft resolution demanding that Iran tell the agency what happened to its bombed nuclear sites and the enriched uranium stored there. The US-drafted text, seen by Reuters on Sunday and circulated ahead of this week's quarterly meeting of the 35-nation board, says Iran must “provide the Agency with precise information on nuclear material accountancy and safeguarded nuclear facilities in Iran” and grant “all access it requires to verify this information.” Both steps are described as “essential and urgent” and must be taken “without delay.” The text stops short of referring Iran to the UN Security Council, a move some diplomats had said was under consideration. But it risks complicating talks between Washington and Tehran. Iran has typically retaliated against resolutions against it at the International Atomic Energy Agency, escalating its nuclear activities or scaling back cooperation. Trump has said he wants Iran's highly enriched uranium removed, particularly what remains of the 440.9 kg enriched to up to 60% purity - a short step from roughly 90% weapons grade - that the IAEA estimates Iran had when Israel first attacked. That amount would be enough, if further enriched, for 10 nuclear weapons, according to an IAEA yardstick. Russia's ambassador to the IAEA told reporters on Friday a resolution would only antagonize Iran. “It was exactly the United States who undermined this cooperation,” he said, referring to the fact the IAEA had access to Iran's sites until the bombing started. Russia and China have opposed all recent resolutions against Iran. “Responsibility for an internationally wrongful act rests with the perpetrator and cannot be transferred to the victim. The Board must not be instrumentalized to relieve those who carried out these attacks of their responsibility,” Iran's mission to the IAEA said on X, referring to the draft resolution and the US strikes. “The Board should be cautious on the path forward. Coercion and confrontation do not lead to cooperation. It undermines prospects of a diplomatic solution,” it added.
