In brief
In a televised statement, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council secretary Mohsen Rezaei said the nation could withdraw from the Treaty on the Non‑Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons if the United States stages an aggressive military action. He emphasized that Iran asserts it has 22 rights under the treaty and that any nuclear negotiations must first secure those rights. The statement highlights growing tensions between Tehran and Washington over nuclear policy and raises questions about the future of the NPT in the region.
Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, announced on July 17 that Iran may consider withdrawing from the Treaty on the Non‑Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) if the United States escalates military pressure. In a televised address from Tehran, Rezaei warned that the United States must first guarantee Iran’s full rights under the treaty before any nuclear talks can take place.
Rezaei said, "At some point, they may want to start a war, and it is unclear whether we will remain in the NPT after any future war. But while we are a party to it, we have 22 rights," according to TASS. He further stressed, "Then we will also say: If you want to discuss the nuclear issue, we will demand our rights first. You must first recognize our rights," indicating that Iran views the treaty’s provisions as a core safeguard to its national sovereignty.
Rezaei’s remarks come amid a broader backdrop of stalled negotiations between Iran and the six P5+1 nations, and the continuing imposition of economic sanctions by the United States and European partners. The NPT, which entered into force in 1970, is the cornerstone of the global non‑proliferation regime and obliges signatories to forgo nuclear weapons development and subject their nuclear facilities to safeguards verification. However, its provisions also grant states the right to pursue nuclear technology for peaceful purposes.
Experts note that the 22 rights highlighted by Rezaei likely refer to mechanisms such as sovereign safeguards, the right to purchase nuclear fuel, access to peaceful nuclear technology, and the possibility to conduct national inspections. The treaty also allows members to claim a right to obtain a Non‑Proliferation Treaty (NPT) status verification and an independent review of their nuclear activities. These rights are intended to balance the objectives of proliferation prevention and the peaceful use of nuclear energy.
The timing of Rezaei’s statement suggests Tehran is preparing for the possibility of a deteriorating relationship with the United States. The Iranian government has repeatedly called on Washington to lift sanctions and let Iran participate in the IAEA safeguards program. The U.S., on the other hand, has maintained a hard‑line stance, insisting that any nuclear negotiations must be predicated on complete dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program.
Rezaei’s threat to exit the NPT raises new geopolitical uncertainties. If Iran were to withdraw, it would undermine the treaty’s universality and could prompt other countries to reconsider their commitments. It could also alter the strategic calculus for regional actors, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, and even China and Russia, all of whom have signaled varying degrees of interest in ensuring regional stability.
Open questions persist. How would the United States respond to Iran’s announcement of a potential exit? What specific rights does the Iranian government consider vital enough to threaten withdrawal? And, crucially, could the threat of exiting the NPT serve as leverage in future negotiations or merely as a warning sign?
Rezaei’s tone underscores a broader narrative that Iran has viewed its nuclear ambitions as part of a sovereign right rather than a clandestine effort. The statement suggests that Tehran is actively preparing ways to enforce its perceived rights under the treaty, and it signals a readiness to pursue these rights to the end of any conflict with the U.S. The outcome of this tense standoff will be closely monitored by both regional policymakers and the international community, as it could reshape the architecture of nuclear diplomacy in the Middle East.
