In a report to IAEA chiefs on Friday, Mr. Grossi said his inspectors had confirmed that Iran was feeding more partially enriched uranium into the cascades of two centrifuges at its Fordov nuclear plant south of Tehran.
“Updated information on the design of the facility indicated that the consequence of this change would be a significant increase in the production rate of UF6 (uranium) enriched to 60%,” the report said. The facility is estimated to produce 34 kg (75 lb) of 60% uranium per month, up from 4.7 kg previously.
The IAEA demanded further “safeguards” from Ford “as a matter of urgency to allow the agency to provide timely and technically sound assurances that the facility is not being misused to produce uranium with a higher level of enrichment than that declared by Iran and that there is no diversion declared nuclear material”.
Iran denies having a military nuclear program. But Mr Grossi told the BBC that its nuclear power facilities had grown over the past decade.
“They have a nuclear program that has grown, expanded in all possible directions.
“The Iran of 2015 has nothing to do with the Iran of 2025. Iran is starting production at 60% (uranium) at a much higher production level, which means they will have the volume they need – if they want it – to have a nuclear weapon. device in a much faster way, so we’re seeing an escalation in that regard, which is very worrying.”
During a visit to Tehran last month, Mr Grossi said Iranian leaders had assured him they would limit production of uranium enriched to 60%.
Iran’s decision to increase production comes after little progress was made last week in nuclear talks between European and Iranian officials.
Mr Grossi said there were groups in Iran that were “very loudly” calling for the country to “do its thing” on nuclear weapons.
“In my conversations with the government, it doesn’t seem to be the path of choice, but they sometimes refer to it as something they may need to review. I hope not. I told them it would be an unfortunate choice.’
Israel has yet to launch a full-scale attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities – but its ministers have openly discussed the possibility.
Asked about the consequences of any such Israeli attack, Mr Grossi said: “I don’t think it will go unanswered, militarily, so I think we need to avoid it.
“We should not forget that a large part of Iran’s nuclear program is underground and very well protected. Therefore, kinetic action against the program would require a large deployment of force.
“I just hope it doesn’t come to that. I know the radiological consequences if you attack a nuclear facility.’
Mr Grossi also warned that the global nuclear non-proliferation regime was under stress as established nuclear powers “seem to be relying more on nuclear weapons or upgrading their arsenals”.
As a result, other countries began to talk more about acquiring nuclear weapons.
“There are countries that say: well, why not us? When we see that we have a world … with new conflicts, big (countries) saying that maybe they can use the nuclear weapons that they have, maybe we should think about our own security.”
