Originally Posted by EagleAye
Actually, the IAEA is potentially biased as
On March 5, 2012, the IAEA chief, Yukiya Amano, said he had “serious concerns” over Iran’s nuclear program and its ambitions. It’s interesting to note, however, that in a ‘Confidential’ diplomatic cable from the U.S. State Department in 2009, American diplomats discussed Amano’s appointment to head the IAEA, and stated that he “displayed remarkable congruence of views with us on conducting the Agency’s missions,” and speaking to an American Ambassador, Amano “thanked the U.S. for having supported his candidacy and took pains to emphasize his support for U.S. strategic objectives for the Agency.” Though, Amano informed the Ambassador, “that he would need to make concessions to the G-77, which correctly required him to be fair-minded and independent, but that he was solidly in the U.S. court on every key strategic decision, from high-level personnel appointments to the handling of Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program.”
Sources are this (Iran: watchdog says suspicious activities continue at blocked sites - Telegraph) and this (US embassy cables: New UN chief is 'director general of all states, but in agreement with us' | World news | guardian.co.uk).
This as well is relevant
In 2010, the Pentagon’s report to Congress stressed that Iran’s strategy in the region was not one of aggression, as our media and politicians would have us believe, but in fact, was a “deterrent strategy.” The report stated, “Iran’s nuclear program and its willingness to keep open the possibility of developing nuclear weapons is a central part of its deterrent strategy.” The U.S. approach to Iran, then, “remains centered on preventing it from obtaining nuclear weapons and on countering Iran’s influence in the Middle East.” Iran itself has claimed that it “pursues a defensive and deterrent strategy.”
The sources are this (Defense.gov News Article: Report to Congress Outlines Iranian Threats) and this (PressTV - 'Iran pursues deterrent defense strategy')
The above excerpts were from this article.
In addition to that, it has been stated that some people are quite skeptical of the IAEA's report as
some, like former CIA officer Philip Giraldi, have grave doubts about the value of the IAEA report.
“I would be very skeptical about this report that is coming out from the International Atomic Energy Agency, because the IAEA doesn’t really have any intelligence capabilities of its own. It is relying on reports that are coming from other people. I would rather suspect these reports are coming from the US and Israel,” says Giraldi.
The source is this (IAEA study as pretext for war on Iran — RT).
Thus, the objectivity of the IAEA is in question due to the current director's potential bias.