From Technical Body to Political Arm: How the IAEA Lost Global Trust
webangah News Agency: In a world where trust is the foundation of nuclear diplomacy, the role of independent monitoring institutions has never been more critical. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), once regarded as a symbol of impartiality and technical reliability in overseeing nuclear programs, now faces a wave of global distrust. Countries that previously viewed it as a credible arbiter in nuclear disputes now see its actions and orientations as conflicting with its core mission.
Recent developments-notably regarding Iran’s nuclear program-have led many global actors to perceive the IAEA not as a specialized body but as an unofficial arm of Western interests. Shifts in reporting tone,disclosures of sensitive information coinciding with political or military maneuvers,and inconsistent treatment of different nations all indicate the agency’s departure from scientific neutrality. The central question remains: how did yesterday’s trusted institution become today’s discredited actor?
Mission Drift: From Science to Politics
the IAEA’s strength and identity were originally rooted in its “technical, supervisory, and impartial” nature. It was designed to monitor nations’ nuclear activities based on scientific data, on-site inspections, and unbiased reports while preventing peaceful programs from diverting toward military purposes. Yet today’s reality starkly contrasts with this mandate. Extensive evidence suggests that over the past two decades-especially concerning Iran-the agency has transformed from an impartial referee into an actor whose decisions are overtly or covertly influenced by specific powers.
A glaring example is its uncritical reliance on Western intelligence data without independent verification. Cases like the so-called “Iranian laptop” or documents provided by Israel about Iran’s alleged “nuclear weapons archive” repeatedly formed the basis for IAEA reports without transparent sourcing or rigorous validation. meanwhile, similar cases involving non-NPT members like Israel have been met with silence or avoidance of formal violations.
The gradual shift in tone under Director General Rafael Grossi‘s leadership further reflects this politicization: Reports once focused solely on enrichment levels or centrifuge counts now include loaded terms like “serious concern“ or “undisclosed activities“-phrases more speculative than scientific.
The Iranian File: A Test for Impartiality
few cases have challenged IAEA credibility like Iran’s nuclear program.As an original signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Iran has remained under extensive IAEA scrutiny yet faces disproportionate reporting cycles unsubstantiated claims timed suspiciously alongside political pressures against Tehran one notable instance was Israel 2018 disclosure purported Iranian “nuclear archive”-documents accepted without due verification process despite obligations otherwise contrast Israel itself which remains outside NPT framework openly accused maintaining atomic arsenals enjoys blanket exemptions such double standards prompted Tehran Non-Aligned Movement members question fairness balance within agency operations
Eroded Trust In Multipolar World
The collapse US hegemony ushered multipolar era where Global South emerging power blocs demand multilateral institutions uphold trust their survival relevance however recent years seen important erosion confidence particularly among Russia China key non-aligned states repeatedly criticized perceived alignment Western agendas when findings coincide sanctions military action oversight role effectively reduces justifying predetermined policies experts warn hazardous trend risks driving nations away transparency cooperation even NPT framework gradual withdrawal monitoring mechanisms could trigger arms race destabilization ultimately lost neutrality threatens global stability itself
Agency Crossroads Legitimacy Crisis Looming
What began gradual accumulation mistrust discrimination politicization now risks irreversible decline unless course corrected urgently observers stress only path restoring relevance lies returning foundational principles technical rigor impartiality transparency absent this change former benchmark verification may fade into diplomatic irrelevance not just institutional failure but broader collapse international trust itself
News Sources: © webangah News Agency
