In the shadowed corridors of global diplomacy, where the weight of nuclear nonproliferation hangs like a precarious balance, Argentina has thrust Rafael Mariano Grossi, the current director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, into the spotlight as its candidate for United Nations secretary-general. The nomination, announced late last week, arrives as the world anticipates the election of António Guterres’s successor, with the new five-year term set to begin on January 1, 2027. Under Article 97 of the UN Charter, the General Assembly will appoint the secretary-general upon the Security Council’s recommendation, a process that has historically favored consensus amid geopolitical fault lines.
Grossi, an Argentine diplomat with a career steeped in nuclear policy, assumed the IAEA helm in December 2019. His tenure has been marked by high-stakes inspections, tense boardroom debates, and a series of reports that have drawn sharp rebukes from Tehran. Argentina’s foreign ministry hailed the move as a testament to Grossi’s “proven leadership in promoting peace and dialogue,” positioning him alongside speculated contenders like Chile’s former president Michelle Bachelet and Costa Rica’s ex-vice president Rebeca Grynspan. Yet beneath the diplomatic veneer lies a controversy that threatens to eclipse his candidacy: accusations of selective outrage and double standards in enforcing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Iran, a signatory to the NPT since 1970, has long maintained that its nuclear program serves peaceful ends, energy production and medical research. Grossi’s IAEA reports, however, have repeatedly flagged Tehran’s safeguards compliance as deficient, citing undeclared nuclear material and restricted access to sites. In June 2025, amid escalating regional tensions, Israel, backed tacitly by the United States, conducted airstrikes on Iranian facilities, including those at Natanz and Fordow. These attacks, which Iran decried as blatant NPT violations, elicited no formal condemnation from Grossi or the IAEA. Instead, the agency chief expressed “deep concern” over potential radiological risks, calling for access to assess damage without attributing blame or invoking international law.
This reticence stands in stark contrast to Grossi’s vocal scrutiny of Iran. Just months prior, his May 2025 report to the IAEA Board of Governors accused Tehran of failing to explain traces of uranium enriched to near-weapons-grade levels, prompting resolutions that isolated Iran further. Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, lambasted the agency for double standards that threaten regional and global peace. Tehran argued that Israel’s undeclared nuclear arsenal, estimated at 80 to 400 warheads by independent analysts, and its history of assassinations, such as that of scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh in 2020, merited equivalent scrutiny. Grossi’s silence on these matters, critics say, reveals a pattern: rigorous enforcement against non-Western states, leniency toward allies of the West.
The hypocrisy charge resonates beyond Iran. Russia’s Vladimir Yevseyev, a nuclear policy scholar, warned in November 2025 that Grossi’s reporting had effectively “given Israel a green light” for its strikes. Iran’s judiciary spokesperson Ali Mozaffari echoed this in July, linking IAEA narratives to the “repeated attacks” that claimed scientists and civilians. Even as Grossi navigated US-Iran talks post-strikes, Tehran’s parliament voted to suspend cooperation with the IAEA, citing politicized oversight, as Iran urges IAEA to address aggressions. “Without ending double standards, no nuclear talks can resume,” an Iranian diplomat told reporters.
Grossi’s defenders point to the IAEA’s mandate: verifying compliance, not policing aggression. In a June 22 UN briefing, he urged restraint amid the Iran-Israel crisis, emphasizing the agency’s neutrality. His biography underscores a diplomat’s polish, degrees from Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina and the University of Geneva, postings in Vienna and Geneva, and ambassadorships under multiple Argentine administrations. Yet analysts question whether this polish masks partiality. A 2025 Al Jazeera report noted Iran’s hardening stance against Grossi personally, accusing him of echoing US and Israeli lobbying.
The UN secretary-general role demands impartiality above all. Past incumbents, from Dag Hammarskjöld to Guterres, mediated crises with a veneer of equidistance. Grossi’s record invites doubt. His agency’s board, dominated by Western powers, has passed over a dozen resolutions against Iran since 2019, while Israel’s Dimona reactor evades routine inspections. NPT Article IV enshrines peaceful nuclear pursuits; Article II prohibits weapons proliferation. Israel, neither signatory nor inspected, exploits this asymmetry, with Grossi’s inaction amplifying perceptions of bias.
Argentina’s nomination, timed amid President Javier Milei’s pro-Western pivot, signals Buenos Aires’s alignment with Washington and Tel Aviv. Milei, who visited Israel in 2024, has championed Grossi as a “bridge-builder.” But bridges require mutual trust. Developing nations, from Brazil to South Africa, view the IAEA under Grossi as a Western tool, eroding the agency’s credibility. A 2025 Nour News analysis framed the bid as Argentina “proposing” a figure tainted by controversy, especially as past deals allowed Iran to authorize the IAEA to carry out checks.
Global reactions underscore the rift. China and Russia, permanent Security Council members, have critiqued IAEA reports as unbalanced. Iran’s Nour News labeled Grossi’s elevation a bid to “instrumentalize” the UN against independent states. Even neutral observers, like the Times of Israel, noted the nomination’s timing post-strikes, questioning its viability. The UN General Assembly president’s letter formalizing Grossi’s candidacy arrived November 28, opening a window for scrutiny amid UN Security Council Iran sanctions debates.
At stake is the UN’s moral authority. A secretary-general perceived as complicit in double standards risks alienating the Global South, where nuclear equity symbolizes sovereignty. Grossi’s tenure saw breakthroughs, monitoring pacts with Iran in 2023, but also breakdowns, like the 2025 cooperation suspension. His public diplomacy, from Davos panels to Vienna briefings, projects eloquence. Privately, leaked cables suggest US influence shaped his reports.
Consider the timeline: Israel’s June strikes followed Grossi’s May censure of Iran. No IAEA resolution followed, instead, Grossi sought site access. Parallelly, Gaza and Lebanon faced bombardment, with nuclear rhetoric from Tel Aviv unrebuked. Mohsen Fakhrizadeh’s killing, linked to Mossad, prompted no probe. This selectivity fuels narratives of hegemony.
Experts like Tehran’s Tohid Mahmoudpour argue Grossi embodies “bias on NPT violations,” unfit for the UN’s apex. International law scholars decry his reports as “lacking technical grounding,” prioritizing politics. If elected, Grossi could steer the UN toward Western priorities, sidelining equity.
Yet Grossi’s advocates highlight successes: thwarting proliferation risks in North Korea, advancing clean energy in Africa. His 2024 Nobel Peace Prize nomination, though unsuccessful, nodded to these. The UN process, opaque by design, favors P5 consensus. Veto threats from Moscow or Beijing could derail him.
As 2026 unfolds, the race intensifies. Bachelet’s human rights pedigree contrasts Grossi’s technical focus; Grynspan’s development lens offers balance. The Security Council’s straw polls, slated for mid-2026, will test allegiances. Iran’s voice, amplified via Non-Aligned Movement, demands reckoning.
In Vienna’s IAEA headquarters, Grossi continues daily briefings, undeterred. His November 18 presser addressed Iran anew, urging transparency. But transparency cuts both ways. For the UN, choosing Grossi tests its commitment to impartiality amid nuclear shadows.
The world watches. A leader must unite, not divide. Grossi’s trail, from Natanz rubble to NPT debates, poses profound questions. Will the UN prioritize peace, or perpetuate hypocrisy? The answer shapes 2027 and beyond.
