Amid escalating military tensions between the Israeli occupation and the Islamic Republic of Iran, Tehran has once again signalled the possibility of withdrawing from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). While Iran continues to assert that its nuclear programme is peaceful in nature, it denies any intention to develop or acquire nuclear weapons.
This stance has been supported by several reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which, to date, has found no concrete evidence that Iran possesses nuclear weapons. However, the agency has also warned that the current level of uranium enrichment in Iran is dangerously close to weapons-grade, fuelling rapid global concern and debate.
Citing the alleged need to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions and address what it called a direct threat to its security, the Israeli occupation forces recently launched targeted strikes. These included the assassination of nuclear scientists and military commanders, as well as the bombing of facilities reportedly linked to Iran’s nuclear programme—claims made in an official statement by the Israeli occupation government.
This report examines the key provisions of the NPT and explores the implications of a potential Iranian withdrawal, especially as discussions loom about a possible new round of negotiations in Oman involving both Iranian and U.S. officials.
What Is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty?
Described as the “cornerstone of the global non-proliferation regime,” the NPT was established under the auspices of the United Nations and the IAEA. It was opened for signature in 1968 and came into force in March 1970.
Comprising 11 articles, the treaty was crafted in response to UN General Assembly resolutions urging a global agreement to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. It declares unequivocally that any nuclear war would bring “devastating consequences for all mankind.”
According to its preamble, the treaty seeks to:
- Cease the production of nuclear weapons
- Eliminate existing stockpiles
- Dismantle delivery systems
- Implement a global disarmament regime under strict and effective international control
The treaty that Iran now threatens to withdraw from was designed to regulate the possession, transfer, and development of nuclear weapons. At the same time, it encourages only peaceful uses of atomic energy.
Western Concerns Over Iran’s Nuclear Progress
The Wall Street Journal recently reported that Iran is now dangerously close to acquiring nuclear weapons capability—prompting urgent calls for the U.S. to reconsider its monitoring strategy.
A report by veteran nuclear inspector David Albright and analyst Sarah Burkhard of the Institute for Science and International Security concluded that Iran has made significant advances in uranium enrichment. According to the report, Iran could theoretically produce a nuclear bomb at any moment.
The findings revealed that Iran had been allowed to enrich uranium to near-breakout levels and had recently expanded a fortified facility near the village of Fordow in Qom Province. The underground nature of this site now gives Iran the potential to accelerate its programme “within days.”
Iran has gradually scaled back its compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal, especially after former U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew from the agreement in 2018 and imposed sweeping sanctions. As a result, various reports have noted a significant acceleration in the scope and intensity of Iran’s nuclear activities.
Who Holds Nuclear Weapons Today?
Since the treaty opened for signature, most of the world’s nations have joined. As of today, the NPT has 191 signatories. In 1995, the treaty was extended indefinitely.
Among the signatories are five officially recognised nuclear-armed states:
- The United States
- Russia
- The United Kingdom
- France
- China
These countries had conducted nuclear tests before 1 January 1967 and are also the five permanent members of the UN Security Council.
On the other hand, countries that have not signed the NPT include:
- Israel (widely believed to possess nuclear weapons but has never officially confirmed it)
- India
- Pakistan
- North Korea (joined in 1985, withdrew in 2003, and conducted multiple nuclear tests)
In a press briefing, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt stated:
“Iran possesses all the materials needed to build a nuclear weapon. All that remains is a political decision by the Supreme Leader. If such a decision is made, weapon production could take just a few weeks.”
What Are the Obligations of Nuclear-Armed States?
Under the NPT, nuclear-armed states are bound by the following key restrictions unless they formally withdraw:
- They must not transfer nuclear weapons or explosive devices to any recipient.
- They must not assist or encourage non-nuclear states in acquiring such weapons.
- They are prohibited from manufacturing or acquiring nuclear weapons through third parties or offering technical assistance in this regard.
Non-Nuclear States and the IAEA Safeguards
Non-nuclear states that sign the NPT are obligated to conclude “safeguards agreements” with the IAEA. These agreements ensure that all nuclear material and technology is used exclusively for peaceful purposes.
To verify compliance, the IAEA conducts regular inspections and monitoring, which prohibit the transfer of raw nuclear materials or specialised equipment to any non-nuclear state unless it is under a verified safeguards regime.
Importantly, both nuclear and non-nuclear signatories retain the inalienable right to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes—without discrimination.
Withdrawal Conditions from the Treaty
The NPT does allow for withdrawal under extraordinary circumstances. A member state may exit the treaty if it believes that its supreme national interests have been jeopardised.
The process requires a three-month formal notice to all other parties and the UN Security Council, along with a detailed explanation of the withdrawal rationale.
Double Standards in Implementation?
Critics argue that the treaty imposes stricter obligations on non-nuclear states compared to nuclear-armed ones, raising concerns over its commitment to genuine, comprehensive disarmament. This asymmetry has long fuelled doubts about the fairness and long-term credibility of the treaty’s objectives.
One Ummah. One platform. One mission.
Your support keeps it alive.
Click here to Donate & Fund your Islamic Independent Platform
