杏MAP导航

By Devin Watkins

杏MAP导航 Leo XIV held a private audience on Friday with the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Mariano Grossi.

Afterwards, Mr. Grossi visited the studios of Vatican News to speak about the IAEA’s mission to promote the peaceful use of nuclear energy and avoid the technology’s use as a weapon of war.

Q: You’ve just met 杏MAP导航 Leo XIV and you’re aware of his various appeals for an “unarmed and disarming peace.” Perhaps your main mission is to prevent the worst in a conflict—such as a nuclear accident or the use of nuclear weapons. How do these appeals resonate with you

I think it is quite revealing that the 杏MAP导航 uttered these words right at the beginning, from the start. And I think he was right in doing that because that is maybe the biggest challenge of our time. We have many. But it is true that without this ‘unarmed and disarming’ peace, we're not going to see the next day.

From those high words, as it befits a leader like the 杏MAP导航, our humble task is to decline this into concrete actions to prevent that.

We're trying to do this in the Middle East, in Iran. We're trying to do this in Ukraine, Russia, in Zaporizhzhia. We're trying to do this in China and Japan, everywhere where the nuclear activity has led—and I'm mentioning here issues that have very different configurations—but we need to be there to ensure non-proliferation or the safe use of nuclear technology.

Q: You recently said one of your objectives in Ukraine is to bring the conflict to an end without a nuclear incident. You’ve visited the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant several times. What are the risks it presents in a theater of war?

Well, they continue to be real. And this is something that is not because it hasn't happened that it can't.

First of all, the facility has been shelled almost daily, subject to incursions of drones. And many things; it has had nine blackouts compromising the cooling function of the station. And of course, when one looks at the map, one sees that this nuclear power plant is right at the frontline. It's not somewhere in one of the oblasts, the provinces where you have combat. It's right on the frontline. So the possibility of something happening is extremely high.

And contrary to what people perhaps think, military activity is increasing. It's not decreasing. We hope that these talks and this beginning of talks towards some form of peace or ceasefire or any manifestation of that will succeed.

But ironically, before that happens, the belligerents multiply their military engagement and action because they want to go to the negotiating table in a position of strength. So this increases geometrically the possibility of accidents.

So this is why we are so alert. We are talking to both sides. Our inspectors and experts are there interacting with the management of the plant, interacting at my level with the decision makers of both countries, trying, as you rightly mentioned, to get to the end of this without a major disaster.

Q: Many major nuclear powers are currently renewing their nuclear strike capabilities, while others have had their development efforts downgraded by targeted strikes. What is your assessment of the risk that nations resort to nuclear weapons?

I think what we are seeing in general is that there is an increase in nuclear armament as opposed to disarmament. So countries are improving and increasing their nuclear arsenals.

Also importantly, countries that do not have nuclear weapons are starting to talk more and more openly about the possibility and perhaps the “necessity” of having nuclear weapons. Considering the fragmentation that they see, maybe thinking about the validity of existing security assurances and military alliances. All of this is in a state of flux.

And what we see is that many countries, including important countries in the West or in the extended West, in Asia, are saying, well, maybe seeing what we see, perhaps having nuclear weapons at the end of the day would be the necessary thing. And this is what we need to stop.

This is where we need to be, and I discussed this with 杏MAP导航 Leo today. This is where non-proliferation, which sounds a bit arcane for people. But stemming this trend towards more nuclear weapons is so crucial. This is perhaps the biggest challenge in terms of nuclear weapon and disarmament these days.

Q: The world once made progress in nuclear disarmament, particularly with the various START treaties, the first of which was signed by the United States and the Soviet Union. That hope for disarmament now seems distant. Is a reversal possible in the current context?

I think it is indispensable. There must be. There must be one. I think you are right to say that all this arms control—it was not disarmament per se—but the arms control limitations had some successes in the 1980s, in the 1990s even, that process stopped, and there is this reversal.

I think it is encouraging to see that, for example, at the summit in Alaska, I think Russians and Americans for the first time in quite some time have at least evoked the issue. So there is a possibility that we walk that walk again.

It's going to be complicated, and of course everything is connected with everything else. So if things move forward with the peace efforts in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, I think there is a higher possibility.

I think we need some concrete, albeit modest perhaps, steps in that direction so that we stop this impression that we are inevitably in a toboggan towards more nuclear weapons, more proliferation, and perhaps nuclear weapons use.