>>> WE TURN NOW TO BRUSSELS, WHERE WORLD LEADERS ARE GATHERED FOR THE FIRST EVER NUCLEAR ENERGY SUMMIT.

IT AIMS TO HIGHLIGHT THE POWER OF NUCLEAR ENERGY IN TACKLING THE CLIMATE CRISIS AND ENHANCING ENERGY SECURITY.

OUR NEXT GUEST, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, RAFAEL GROSSI, CO-CHAIRED THE EVENT, WHICH IS MORE URGENT THAN EVER GIVEN THE WARS AND TENSIONS THAT ARE HAPPENING AROUND THE WORLD, SUCH AS PUTIN'S INVASION OF UKRAINE AND WILLINGNESS TO CONDUCT MILITARY OPERATIONS THAT THREATEN THE MASSIVE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS THERE.

JUST BEFORE THE SUMMIT, WALTER ISAACSON SPOKE TO RAFAEL GROSSI ABOUT THESE SERIOUS SAFETY CONCERNS.

>> THANK YOU, CHRISTIANE, AND RAFAEL GROSSI, WELCOME BACK TO THE SHOW.

>> YES, MY PLEASURE.

HELLO.

>> YOU RECENTLY MET WITH RUSSIAN PRESIDENT PUTIN ABOUT THE ZAPORIZHZHIA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT IN UKRAINE.

IT'S THE LARGEST I THINK IN EUROPE AND RUSSIA CONTROLS IT.

WHAT WERE YOUR CONCERNS AND WHAT DID PRESIDENT PUTIN SAY TO YOU?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, THIS IS PART OF MY EFFORTS, ONGOING EFFORTS SINCE THE PLANT WAS -- CAME UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

BUT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING THERE.

I HAVE ESTABLISHED A PERMANENT PRESENCE OF THE IAEA THERE.

AND I WAS IN KYIV AS WELL.

I MET WITH PRESIDENT ZELENSKYY.

AND THEN OF COURSE I NEEDED TO GO TO THE OTHER SIDE AND, YOU KNOW, WE DISCUSS A NUMBER OF THINGS.

WE DISCUSSED SOME TECHNICAL ISSUES, YOU KNOW, AS YOU SAID, THIS IS THE LARGEST, THE BIGGEST NUCLEAR POWER PLANT IN EUROPE, SIX BIG REACTORS, SIX GIGAWATTS OF CAPACITY THERE.

AND MANY OF COURSE OPEN QUESTIONS, BECAUSE WE SHOULD NEVER FORGET THAT THIS FACILITY IS EXACTLY ON THE FRONT LINE OF THE WAR.

SO IT'S NOT IN THE VICINITY OR SOMEWHERE NEAR.

IT'S QUITE DRAMATIC IN THAT SENSE.

SO WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST SITUATIONS OF SHEDDING AT THE -- SHELLING AT THE PLANT.

AND BLACKOUTS.

IT'S VERY DANGEROUS BECAUSE THIS WOULD COUNT A COOLING FUNCTION THEREFORE POTENTIALLY LEADING TO A NUCLEAR ACCIDENT.

SO THERE ARE MANY, MANY ISSUES THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS AND MY LAST TRIP TO SOCHI IN FACT, SOUTH RUSSIA WHERE WE HAD A LONG CONVERSATION.

PUTIN AND I PUT PAST A NUMBER OF MESSAGES OF THINGS THAT SHOULD BE DONE THERE.

AND ALSO LOOK INTO THE WIDER PERSPECTIVE OF THE PLANT AND OTHER EFFORTS TO BRING THE SITUATION TO A MORE STABLE PLACE.

>> SO YOU'RE IN SOCHI WITH PRESIDENT PUTIN SITTING WITH HIM FOR A WHILE.

TELL ME WHAT WAS THAT LIKE, AND WHAT ELSE DID HE DISCUSS?

WHAT DID YOU MAKE OF HIS MIND-SET NOW?

>> WELL, I MUST SAY, THIS IS NOT MY FIRST TIME WITH HIM SINCE THE WAR STARTED.

I HAD A YEAR AGO MORE OR LESS A LONG MEETING IN ST. PETERSBURG.

AND THESE MEETINGS I MUST SAY OBJECTIVELY SPEAKING ARE VERY PROFESSIONAL, VERY THOUGHTFUL.

HE HAS A VERY, YOU KNOW, GOOD UNDERSTANDING NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY.

SO IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE A VERY THOUGHTFUL CONVERSATION OF SPECIFIC ISSUES RELATED TO THE FUNCTIONING OF THE PLANT AND ALSO SOME OTHERS THAT ARE OF A MORE GENERAL NATURE RELATED TO THE SITUATION THERE, THE SITUATION AROUND THE PLANT AND SO ON.

SO I WOULD SAY YES, IT WAS A VERY, VERY POINTED AND VERY METICULOUS TECHNICAL CONVERSATION.

>> YOU SAY HE IS VERY GOOD AT THE TECHNICALITIES OF UNDERSTANDING THE NUCLEAR PLANT.

HOW CONVINCE READY YOU THAT HE ABSOLUTELY WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS NO BIG ACCIDENT AT THAT PLANT OR ANY OF THE OTHERS IN UKRAINE?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW, IT'S A BIT OF SPECULATION, ISN'T IT?

BUT FOR ME, ONE VERY BASIC ONE COULD SAY COMMON SENSE RULE TELLS US THAT A NUCLEAR ACCIDENT THERE WOULD BENEFIT NO ONE.

UKRAINE, RUSSIA, OR THE REST OF EUROPE.

SO IT IS IN THIS SENSE FOR ME, FOR MY JOB, IT IS EASIER TO CONVINCE THE LEADERS TO DO CERTAIN THINGS OR NOT TO DO OTHER THINGS IN ORDER TO AVOID SITUATIONS THAT COULD SCALE UP TO SOME CONFRONTATION AROUND THE PLANT, WHICH WOULD BE OF COURSE EXTREMELY DANGEROUS.

>> A YEAR AGO WHEN YOU WERE TALKING TO CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR ON THIS SHOW, YOU TALKED ABOUT TRYING TO ESTABLISH A ZONE OF PROTECTION AROUND THE PLANT.

HOW'S THAT GOING?

>> WELL, I -- THAT APPROACH CHANGED.

I WENT TO THE UNITED NATIONS SECURITY COUNCIL A FEW MONTHS AGO.

AND INSTEAD OF TRYING TO ESTABLISH AT THE LIMITATION WITH THE TERRITORIAL CONNOTATION, WE MOVED INTO A BEHAVIORAL TYPE OF THING.

BASICALLY DON'T DO THIS, DO THAT, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE EASILY UNDERSTOOD BY EVERYBODY AT A TIME WHERE THE SECURITY COUNCIL IS A PLACE WHERE AGREEMENTS ARE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO GET.

I GOT WIDESPREAD IF NOT ABSOLUTE SUPPORT FOR THIS, WHICH WAS NOT A PROPOSAL BY THE RUSSIANS OR FROM THE UKRAINIANS.

IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE IAEA WAS SAYING THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO NOW IF WE WANT TO AVOID A NUCLEAR ACCIDENT.

SO IT'S A VERY CLEAR SET OF CRITERIA THAT NEED TO BE OBSERVED.

AND THIS IS -- WHAT WE HAVE CONSIDERED INITIALLY AS A ZONE SANCTUARY, IF YOU WILL, AROUND THE PLANT BUBBLE, THIS AS I WAS SAYING AT THE FRONT LINES OF A WAR IS VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN.

MILITARY COMMANDERS ON ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER WILL -- YOU KNOW, IT WILL BE VERY DIFFICULT TO CONVINCE THEM NOT TO OPERATE THERE, TO MOVE THERE, TO DO CERTAIN THINGS.

SO I SHIFTED MY APPROACH INTO CERTAIN THINGS THAT NEEDED TO BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS.

AND OF COURSE I DON'T WANT TO JINX IT, BUT SO FAR WE HAVE BEEN ABLE TO AVOID THE RISK.

NATURALLY, AND I WILL TO SAY THIS VERY CLEARLY, UNTIL WE COME TO THE END OF THIS STORY WITHOUT NUCLEAR ACCIDENT, HE WILL NEVER SAY THAT THINGS ARE OKAY OR STABLE OR WHATEVER, BECAUSE THEY ARE SIMPLY NOT.

IT'S A DAY BY DAY EFFORT THAT GO THROUGH.

>> YOU SAY THINGS ARE NOT TOTALLY STABLE.

THERE IS ALWAYS SOME WORRY.

WHAT IS YOUR BIGGEST WORRY?

>> WELL, HAVE I TWO, BASICALLY.

ONE IS OF COURSE THE POSSIBILITY THERE ARE ALWAYS SOME EPISODES OF SHELLING, OF SOMETHING.

NOW WE HAVE THE APPEARANCE OF THE DRONES AND SOME DRONES ARE LOADED WITH EXPLOSIVES.

SO THAT IS ANOTHER THREAT THAT WE ARE SEEING.

THAT IS ONE, AND AS I MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO, THE BLACKOUT.

SO THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS STATION IS WITHOUT ANY POWER, ANY EXTERNAL POWER SUPPLY FOR LONG PERIOD OF TIME, THEN THE EMERGENCY GENERATORS RAN OUT OF FUEL, AND THEN YOU HAVE A MELTDOWN.

SO THOSE SCENARIOS ARE NOT IMPOSSIBLE.

AND THIS IS WHAT WE NEED TO AVOID.

AND THIS IS WHY WE HAVE OUR TEAM THERE, TEAM OF EXPERTS.

LIVES THERE, INFORMING US BY THE MINUTE WHAT IS THE SITUATION.

YOU MIGHT HAVE NOTICED THAT FROM ZAPORIZHZHIA, YOU VERY RARELY GET FAKE STORIES OR STRANGE STORIES.

AND IT'S BECAUSE THE IAEA IS THERE.

SO WE CAN SAY EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING, IF SOMEBODY SAYS WE ARE BEING ATTACKED OR WHATEVER.

OR THE CONTRARY, FIRE IS COMING FROM THE STATION.

I HAVE MY GUYS THERE.

SO THEY ARE TELLING ME EXACTLY WHAT IS GOING ON, WHAT'S GOING ON MORE TECHNICAL ASPECTS THAT WOULD BE PERHAPS A BIT BORING TO DESCRIBE HERE.

BUT ANY WAY, THE IMPORTANT THING IS THE IAEA IS THERE.

WE'RE NOT GOING ANYWHERE UNTIL THIS COMES TO A BETTER PLACE.

>> YOU SAY THAT EXPERTS FROM YOUR AGENCY ARE THERE.

I THINK YOU'VE DONE A COUPLE ROTATIONS IN THE PLANT.

WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU'RE THERE?

WHAT'S IT LIKE?

>> WELL, THERE NORMALLY WHAT WE DO IS WHEN I PERSONALLY GO, THE PEOPLE THERE, THEY HAVE A TEAM.

THEY GO TO NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, ESPECIALLY ONE WITH SIX REACTORS.

IT'S A HUGE CITE, SITE, VERY BIG SITE, WHERE THERE ARE MANY SAFETY FUNCTIONS THAT WE NEED TO CHECK THAT ARE BEING PERFORMED WELL.

WE NEED TO CHECK THE WATER LEVELS OF THE COOLING FUNCTION.

WE NEED TO GO TO THE CONTROL ROOMS AND SEE HOW THIS IS GOING.

SO WE HAVE LIKE A CHECKLIST, IF YOU WANT THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH EVERY DAY.

WHEN I GO, OF COURSE, I HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET THE MANAGEMENT, AND THEN WE CAN ADDRESS MORE GENERAL ISSUES AS WELL.

>> PRESIDENT PUTIN HAS THREATENED OR HINTED THAT HE MIGHT ACTUALLY USE NUCLEAR WEAPONS OR TACTICAL BATTLEFIELD NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN THIS WAR, ESPECIALLY I WOULD GUESS IF THE RED LINES LIKE CRIMEA WERE ATTACKED.

LIKELY IT IS, AND WHAT WOULD TRIGGER THAT, DO YOU THINK?

>> WELL, YOU KNOW THE USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS BY COUNTRIES THAT ARE LEGITIMATE POSSESSORS OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, BASICALLY THE FIFE PERMANENT MEMBERS OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES ACCORDING TO THE TREATY OF NONPROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS, THESE COUNTRIES CAPPED THESE NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

THESE WHAT THESE COUNTRIES NORMALLY HAVE IS A SETTER OF PRESENCE PAL SCENARIOS ACCORDING TO WHICH THEY WOULD RESORT TO USING NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

NORMALLY, THEY ARE NOT SO DISSIMILAR, I WOULD SAY, AND NORMALLY THEY ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE OBVIOUS THINGS, EUROPE BEING ATTACKED WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS, OR IN A MORE I WOULD SAY GENERAL SENSE, BEING AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT THAT WOULD MAKE THE POSSESSOR OF A NUCLEAR WEAPON USE IT.

THIS IS THE SITUATION.

THIS IS VALID.

THIS HAS BEEN REITERATED.

BY ALL.

AT THE SAME TIME, I WISH TO REMIND THAT THESE COUNTRIES SAID AND REPEATED THAT FAMOUS OLD FORMULA THAT I THINK WAS UTTERED BY SECRETARY GORBACHEV ADDRESSING PRESIDENT REAGAN, THAT A NUCLEAR WAR CAN NEVER BE WON AND MUST NEVER BE FOUGHT.

SO IF YOU UNLEASH A NUCLEAR CONFLICT, THE LOGIC OF IT COULD VERY EASILY LEAD US TO TOTAL DESTRUCTION.

SO MY IMPRESSION WOULD BE THAT THERE WOULD BE RESTRAINT.

OF COURSE THERE ARE SOME STATEMENTS WHICH ARE REGRETTABLE.

I WOULD NOT GET INTO THAT, OF COURSE, BUT WHAT I'M GIVING YOU IS THE PARAMETERS, THE PARAMETERS THAT DO EXIST AND THAT WE HOPE WILL BE RESPECTED.

>> WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THOSE PARAMETERS, YOU JUST SAID SOMETHING, WHICH IS IF THE COUNTRY FACES AN EXISTENTIAL THREAT, MEANING A THREAT TO ITS EXISTENCE.

DO YOU THINK CRIMEA IS AN EXISTENTIAL ISSUE FOR RUSSIA?

>> I WOULDN'T GO INTO THAT.

FIRST OF ALL, CRIMEA IS AN OCCUPIED TERRITORY ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW.

SO FRANKLY SPEAKING, FOR ME TO INDICATE WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT WHERE RUSSIA WILL RESORT TO NUCLEAR WEAPONS WOULD BE IMPRUDENT.

I WOULD SIMPLY SAY NUCLEAR WEAPONS HAVE NO PLACE IN GENERAL, BUT IN PARTICULAR, IN FAMILIAR THIS CONFLICT, I DON'T SEE THEM BEING USED.

I HOPE THIS WOULD BE THE CASE.

>> PRESIDENT PUTIN HAS SAID THAT HE IS PULLING OUT OF THE NEW START TREATY, WHICH IS A LONG-STANDING STRATEGIC ARMS TREATY ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS BETWEEN EAST AND WEST.

WHAT DO YOU THINK THE IMPLICATIONS OF THAT ARE AND IS THERE ANY WAY TO PREVENT THAT?

>> WELL, I THINK THE IMPLICATIONS OF THAT IS THAT THE ARMS CONTROL AS OPPOSED TO DISARMAMENT, THE ARMS CONTROL STRUCTURES THAT PREPARE BETWEEN YOU SAID THE WEST.

I WOULD SAY THE UNITED STATES AND THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ARE BEING ERODED.

AND THE PROCESSES THAT LED TO THESE DIALOGUE THAT EXISTED AND THE CONTROL REDUCTIONS ARE SIGNALS WHICH REACHED IN THE 1970s AND THE 1980s INCREDIBLE PROPORTIONS WILL CEASE TO BE REDUCED, WHICH IS NOT OF COURSE A GOOD THING.

I THINK IN GENERAL WHAT WE CAN SAY IS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, THEY SHOULD BE RETURNED TO THIS DIALOGUE AND THIS FORM COULD BE THE START, A NEW START OR ANY KIND OF AGREEMENT THAT MAY EXIST.

BUT IT IS CLEAR THAT THE NUMBER OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS MUST BE REDUCED AND ULTIMATELY ELIMINATED COMPLETELY.

BUT WE KNOW THAT IS NOT FOR TOMORROW.

>> FOR THE PAST 50 YEARS, THIS WHOLE NOTION OF HAVING A NUCLEAR ARMS NEGOTIATION PROCESS, WHETHER IT WAS START OR SALT OR THE INTERMEDIATE NUCLEAR WEAPONS TREATIES, IT WASN'T JUST ABOUT THE OUTCOME OF THOSE TREATIES, IT WAS A PROCESS WHERE THE SIDES SAT DOWN AND TRIED TO NEGOTIATE NUCLEAR ARMS.

NOW WE DON'T HAVE THIS PROCESS.

IS THERE ANY WAY YOU THINK WE CAN RESTART AT LEAST NEGOTIATIONS ABOUT NUCLEAR ARMS FOR THE SAKE OF HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS AGAIN?

>> IT'S THE NEXT IMPORTANT.

I THINK THAT THE CONTEXT AND DIALOGUE IN DISPENSABLE.

NARROWING, IF YOU ALLOW ME, THE SPECTRUM TO WHAT WE ARE DOING AT THE MOMENT AS THE IAEA WE ARE THE ONLY CONDUIT FOR UP SOME TYPE OF CONVERSATION BETWEEN KYIV AND MOSCOW, BECAUSE THERE IS NO DIRECT CONVERSATION.

THERE WAS SOME IN THE BEGINNING OF THE WAR IN THE SPRING OF 2022.

THEN THEREAFTER, NO PROCESS TOOK PLACE.

AND WHAT WE ARE SEEING AGAIN AT THE LEVEL OF THE SUPER POWERS IS FOLLOWING THAT LOGIC OF TALKING PAST EACH OTHER AND SOMETIMES INCREASINGLY ALARMING TALK.

THERE IS A NEED OF COURSE ALWAYS FOR DIPLOMACY.

>> A SENIOR OFFICIAL IN PRESIDENT BIDEN'S ADMINISTRATION WHO RECENTLY SAID THAT RIGHT NOW IS WHEN THE NUCLEAR RISK IS MOST AFTER THE FOREFRONT.

DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

AND IF SO, WHY?

>> WELL, I THINK WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING HERE WOULD BE A CONFIRMATION OF THE GENERAL VALIDITY OF THAT ASSERTION.

WE ARE IN A WORLD WHERE DIALOGUE AMONG THE SUPER POWERS HAVE BROKEN DOWN.

WE SEE MORE NUCLEAR WEAPONS, MORE NUCLEAR WEAPONS BRO DUCED.

WE HAVE A DIRECT CONFRONTATION WAR AT THE HEART OF EUROPE.

WE ALSO SEE AND HEAR THE CLOSURE TO MY OMISSION WHICH IS NONPROLIFERATION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

WELL SEE COUNTRIES TOYING, PLAYING WITH THE IDEA OF DEVELOPING THEIR OWN NUCLEAR WEAPONS ON TOP OF THE NUCLEAR WEAPONS WE ALREADY HAVE.

SO THAT CONFIGURATION EXTREMELY CONCERTING FOR US.

OF COURSE, WE FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, OF COURSE, I CANNOT TALK TALK ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE BEYOND MY MANDATE.

BUT ON OUR SIDE AND THE AREA OF PREVENTING PROLIFERATION, WEAPONS ARE EXTREMELY ACTIVE.

I JUST RETURNED FROM A TOUR IN THE MIDDLE EAST.

I WAS IN BAGHDAD.

I WAS IN SYRIA.

HAVE I AN OPEN PROCESS WITH IRAN AS YOU KNOW.

SO WE ARE TRYING TO REINFORCE THE NORMS OF NONPROLIFERATION WHEREVER WE CAN SO THAT THE LANDSCAPE DOESN'T GET ANY BLEAKER THAN IT ALREADY.

>> RAFAEL GROSSI, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> GREAT PLEASURE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.