Iran Reaffirms Commitment to Non-Proliferation Treaty Amid Earlier Calls in Parliament to Withdraw

Key Facts

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman said on November 10 that the country remains committed to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, an official position that draws a clear line against reports of domestic calls to withdraw. He said attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities had complicated implementation of safeguards obligations, adding that “other parties imposed conditions—the attacks carried out by the United States and the Zionist regime on our nuclear facilities—and caused problems with implementing safeguards obligations.” The statement comes amid Iranian debate over the treaty’s future, but the Foreign Ministry’s declared position that day was to remain committed to it. On October 31, lawmaker Ebrahim Rezaei said 10 proposals to withdraw had been registered and that the option of leaving was under consideration. Those parliamentary proposals remain separate from an official announcement of withdrawal or a declared change in government policy.

Disputes over nuclear obligations are also linked to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s ability to verify Iran’s nuclear material. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi told the UN Security Council in late October that the agency had been unable to verify the material because Tehran “has not provided the information and access required.” This access shortfall makes safeguards a central part of the diplomatic dispute, alongside the political question of whether Iran will remain in the treaty. The Iranian spokesman, meanwhile, said safeguards obligations had faced difficulties because of the attacks on the facilities, linking the complications to security developments. The November 10 statement did not say that Iran had ended its obligations or withdrawn from the treaty.

In a sign of continued cooperation with the agency to some extent, the Foreign Ministry spokesman confirmed that new inspections had been conducted at the Bushehr nuclear power plant a few days earlier. Al Jazeera said Bushehr was the only Iranian facility that remained accessible to the agency and had not been directly bombed during the war. This means access to the site did not resolve the broader dispute over the information and access needed to verify nuclear material elsewhere. The gap between inspections at Bushehr and the inability to conduct broader verification places safeguards at the heart of any discussion of new nuclear arrangements. It also shows that continued limited inspections do not amount to comprehensive verification of Iran’s nuclear material.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty allows withdrawal with 3 months’ notice if a state decides that extraordinary events have jeopardized its supreme interests. This notice period provides a procedural framework for any withdrawal, but it does not mean that raising parliamentary proposals or discussing the option automatically triggers the process. Rezaei said on October 31 that 10 proposals to withdraw had been registered and that withdrawal was under consideration. The Foreign Ministry spokesman then said on November 10 that Iran remains committed to the treaty. The picture therefore combines domestic political debate over withdrawal with a declared official position of continued commitment, while implementation of safeguards remains disputed.

These positions come against the backdrop of efforts to prevent a return to war. Al Jazeera reported on November 10 that Qatar and Pakistan were carrying messages between Iran and the United States. It described the mediation efforts as aimed at preventing another full-scale war, keeping the diplomatic channel open alongside the nuclear dispute. On negotiations, Tehran has said it will not accept the removal of highly enriched uranium from the country, but remains open to reducing its enrichment level under international supervision inside Iran. It has also said it will not give up enrichment entirely, while it could accept restrictions similar to those it accepted under the 2015 nuclear deal. These positions tie any potential understanding to conditions concerning where uranium is processed, enrichment levels and international monitoring.

Al Jazeera said reaching an agreement that comprehensively addresses Iran’s nuclear program would also require resolving hostilities in the Strait of Hormuz and beyond. That places security and regional issues alongside nuclear arrangements in the negotiating process, according to its report on November 10. The available information did not specify a date for a new round of negotiations or an expected outcome from the mediation efforts. The specific development in Iran’s official position was its reaffirmation of commitment to the treaty while acknowledging that the attacks had complicated implementation of safeguards commitments. The next step remains tied to continued contacts between Tehran and Washington and to the access sought by the International Atomic Energy Agency.