Iran must determine based on its own national interests whether it should withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), said Iranian political analyst Mehdi Shahmirza.
The Iranian Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee Spokesman Ebrahim Rezaei said Friday that it is time for Iran to withdraw from the NPT, as the treaty has failed to protect Iran's nuclear facilities from the ongoing U.S. and Israeli attacks. In a post on social media platform X, Rezaei said there is no benefit for Iran to remain part of the pact.
Iranian Parliament is considering the country's withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said on Monday at a weekly press conference. He said Iran has never sought to develop nuclear weapons and does not intend to do so, noting that the country's position on the prohibition of making weapons of mass destruction is clear.
In an interview with China Global Television Network, Shahmirza stressed that the Iranian government now faces a nuanced dilemma in regards to the treaty.
"The essence and foundation of the NPT - the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons - is, in its substance, a good treaty. That is, it doesn't mean it has no function, but unfortunately, in recent years, due to the use of political leverage, sometimes even security leverage, this treaty has somewhat lost its effectiveness. Whether withdrawal could be put on the agenda is a matter that will be weighed against national interests, and if such a decision were to be made, the relevant institutions would take it," he said.
Asked why Iran has not withdrawn from the NPT so far, Shahmirza said the country had hoped to establish mutual trust with the world on the matter of nuclear weapons.
"Because Iran has always had a policy of transparency and has sought to give the international community assurance that it is absolutely not pursuing the construction or development of nuclear weapons. That is why it joined this treaty. No treaty is permanent, and national interests are what stabilize treaties," said the analyst.
"Right now, we see that this treaty practically provides no benefit for us. We are looking at it - what is its utility? One must ask: what is its advantage? This treaty is set up so that when a country joins the NPT and agrees to all kinds of limitations — which the inspections impose — it is meant to create legitimacy and prevent nuclear war. Yet today, two powers are targeting all our nuclear facilities, even though we are part of this treaty. This treaty is meant to prevent war, to prevent any hostile action by one country against another, but we see that in practice, this treaty is not functioning," he added.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has repeated its calls for restraint in the Middle East after Israel struck two Iranian nuclear facilities, including a uranium processing plant.
The conflict began on Feb. 28, when Israel and the United States launched joint attacks on Tehran and several other Iranian cities, killing Iran's then Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, along with senior military commanders and civilians. Iran has responded by launching waves of missile and drone strikes targeting Israel and U.S. bases and assets in the Middle East.
The United States and Israel have targeted several nuclear facilities in Iran since the war started.
Iran's nuclear non-proliferation treaty exit hinges on national interest: expert
