Detonating Diplomacy: Understanding the NPT & Iran’s Push to Exit -

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) signed in 1968 and in effect since 1970 is the bedrock of global nuclear non‑proliferation. With 191 signatories, it has three core pillars:

Non‑proliferation: Non-nuclear states commit to not acquiring nuclear weapons.
Disarmament: Nuclear-armed states pledge to work toward eliminating nuclear arsenals.
Peaceful use: All signatories retain the right to use nuclear technology for civilian purposes under International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) oversight .

This compromise has held since the Cold War. But growing suspicion, stalled disarmament, and regional frictions have strained its delicate balance.

Why the NPT Matters

Global security: Preventing nuclear weapons’ spread is essential in a world where more actors could unleash destruction.
Regional stability: The Middle East, with only Israel outside the NPT, risks proliferation races whenever tensions spike.
International oversight: The IAEA audits nuclear programs to ensure compliance—censures signal serious breaches.

Two major developments fuel Iran’s move to potentially exit the treaty:

1. IAEA’s First Censure in 20 Years

In early June 2025, the IAEA formally rebuked Iran for “failing to meet obligations” by denying inspectors access and withholding explanations about undeclared uranium traces. In response, Iran swiftly within days announced a third enrichment facility and installed advanced centrifuges at the Fordo site.

2. Israeli Airstrikes Target Nuclear Sites

On June 12–13, Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, striking Iran’s nuclear sites, including Natanz, claiming Iran was “on the verge of building a nuclear bomb”. Iran retaliated with missile barrages against Israeli cities. Civilian casualties mounted on both sides over 224 in Iran and 24 in Israel—with retaliatory strikes now entering a fourth day.

Iran Mulls Withdrawal from the NPT

On June 16, 2025, the Iranian foreign ministry stated that parliament is preparing legislation to exit the NPT. Though no final vote has occurred, lawmakers cite these grievances:

Israel’s attacks on nuclear and military infrastructure.
The IAEA censure impinging on diplomatic legitimacy.
A belief that NPT obligations should enhance security—not provoke insecurity.

As Iranian spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei put it, “those voting for the [IAEA] resolution prepared the ground for the attack”. Parliamentarian Ebrahim Rezai stated bluntly, “Now is the time to withdraw from the NPT” However, there’s dissent within Iran: some media and MPs deny any decision has been made, calling it “at initial stages” and emphasizing BP’s stance against nuclear weapons

What It All Means: Global Ripples

If Iran exits: It could restart nuclear weapons development outside IAEA supervision. Regional rivals like Saudi Arabia and the UAE might pursue their own arsenals.
International backlash: UN Security Council could consider new sanctions. The diplomatic window for Iran–US or Iran–Europe talks may slam shut.
Strategic brinkmanship: Iran appears signaling, “attack us and we’ll change nuclear rules”a warning aimed at Israel (and U.S.) deterrence.

The NPT’s Crisis Point

Iran’s threatened exit highlights modern treaty weaknesses:

Unequal treatment: Non-nuclear states argue nuclear-armed powers have stalled disarmament (Article VI of NPT).
Regional asymmetry: Israel remains outside the treaty while others comply—fueling perceptions of double standards.
Enforcement limitations: The treaty cannot prevent withdrawal or compel compliance once a state decides to exit.

What Comes Next?

Parliamentary process: The draft bill requires debate, potential amendments, and final approval—likely weeks away.
Diplomatic leverage: Global players may intensify negotiations or threaten consequences to deter Iran’s withdrawal.
Conflict escalation: As military strikes and nuclear risk converge, a broader Middle East war becomes more dangerous.

Sources:

More Current Affairs: https://learnproacademy.in/updates/