TEHRAN — A group of 130 Iranian lawmakers has signed a statement calling for the Islamic Republic to reconsider its membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), stating that international mechanisms have failed to protect the country’s rights and security.
Meysam Zohourian, a member of parliament from Mashhad and a member of the Economic Commission, said Monay the statement emphasizes the need for Iran to reconsider its NPT membership in light of recent developments and the ineffectiveness of international mechanisms in safeguarding Iran’s rights and security.
The statement goes beyond calling for a review of membership, explicitly urging parliament to begin the legal process for Iran’s withdrawal from the treaty and to establish new scientific, technical and legal cooperation with what it calls like-minded countries.
“The NPT is based on the reciprocal balance of ‘commitment to non-proliferation’ and ‘guaranteeing the rights and security of members,’” the lawmakers said.
“However, the experience of recent years, and especially recent developments, has proven that international structures based on this treaty have suffered complete ineffectiveness, structural discrimination, and inefficiency in securing the minimum legal rights of our country,” they said.
The lawmakers said their position is based on their responsibility to protect national security and Iran’s vital interests, as well the achievements of the martyred Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei and Iranian nuclear scientists.
They cited four main reasons for their call: the failure of international mechanisms to protect Iran’s nuclear facilities; attacks and sabotage against nuclear infrastructure and the assassination of nuclear scientists; Iran’s deprivation of the legal benefits of the NPT; and the misuse of International Atomic Energy Agency inspections for espionage and political pressure.
On nuclear facilities, the lawmakers said that peaceful sites operating under international safeguards should receive the highest level of international protection against threats and military attacks.
“Unfortunately, the responsible institutions have not only taken no deterrent action against the enemy’s open threats and attacks against Iran’s nuclear centers, but have practically endorsed these aggressions through silence and passivity,” the statement said.
They said direct attacks and organized sabotage against Iran’s nuclear centers and infrastructure, the “two recent imposed wars,” the assassination of nuclear scientists and repeated threats by U.S. and Israeli officials of nuclear attacks have demonstrated the failure of existing international protections.
“Accepting maximum supervision has brought not the slightest security for the Iranian nation and has only become a tool for identifying and targeting the country’s power components,” the lawmakers said.
They also stated that Iran has failed to receive the benefits guaranteed under Article IV of the NPT despite implementing its obligations and accepting extensive international monitoring.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran, despite fully implementing its obligations and accepting unprecedented supervision, has always been deprived of its rights explicitly stated in Article 4 of the treaty, particularly non-discriminatory enjoyment of peaceful technology and international cooperation,” the statement said.
“Instead, it has faced the harshest oppressive and illegal sanctions,” it added.
The lawmakers further hit out at the IAEA for allowing its inspections to be used for purposes beyond nuclear verification.
“The inspections of the International Atomic Energy Agency have become not a tool for verification, but a cover for industrial-security espionage and the imposition of continuous political pressure against Iran,” they said.
They cited the “unjustified referral” of Iran’s nuclear case to the United Nations Security Council as the latest example.
The IAEA Board of Governors last week adopted a resolution referring Iran to the UN Security Council over alleged breaches of its nuclear safeguards obligations, a move Tehran condemned as politically motivated. 
Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei said the IAEA’s actions could push countries toward withdrawing from the NPT.
“The continuation of this contradictory process makes withdrawal from one-sided and harmful obligations a rational and strategic necessity,” the lawmakers said.
They emphasized that Iran’s “security, authority and dignity” are non-negotiable and invoked Article 10 of the NPT, which provides for withdrawal when a member determines that extraordinary events related to the treaty have endangered its supreme interests.
The statement quoted Article 10 as saying that a member may withdraw if it determines that “extraordinary events, related to the subject matter of this Treaty, have jeopardized the supreme interests of its country.”
It also noted the treaty’s requirement that a withdrawing state provide three months’ prior notice to the other treaty members and the UN Security Council.
“Therefore, with the continuation of existential threats, open aggression against the country’s soil and facilities, and the absolute ineffectiveness of international guarantees, ‘the supreme interests and national security of Iran’ are in serious danger and an extraordinary situation,” the lawmakers said.
The Central Council of the parliamentary group called on the presiding board of the Islamic Consultative Assembly to activate the legal process for Iran’s complete withdrawal from the NPT “in the shortest possible time,” while pursuing new international cooperation with countries it considers friendly.
The parliamentary initiative came alongside increasingly forceful statements from other Iranian officials about the possibility of leaving the treaty.
Abbas Goudarzi, spokesman for parliament’s presiding board, said on Sunday that Iran could easily withdraw from the NPT and reconsider its nuclear doctrine. 
He said trusting the United States would amount to accepting “deception,” adding that “only the language of force and the logic of power” works in dealing with Washington.
Goudarzi described withdrawal from the NPT and reconsideration of Iran’s nuclear doctrine as “fully attainable and easily achievable,” according to Iranian media reports.
He also warned that negotiations that weakened Iran’s regional allies or gave its adversaries an opportunity to regroup would constitute a “strategic mistake.” agricultural products, parcels and industrial materials. 
Heating costs are another looming problem. MarketWatch reported that heating-oil prices could rise substantially this winter, adding another expense for households in colder parts of the United States.
The energy shock is also becoming a financial-market shock. U.S. 10-year Treasury yields crossed 5% on Monday, their highest level since 2023, as investors reacted to the combination of rising oil prices, inflation risks and geopolitical uncertainty. 
Brent crude moved above $108 a barrel after disruptions to Saudi oil infrastructure intensified concerns about global supply.
The supply picture is fueling the anxiety. Reuters reported Sunday that damage to Saudi Arabia’s East-West pipeline threatens the loss of around 4% of global oil supply if the system cannot be restored, while Saudi Arabia could exhaust stocks available for export if the disruption persists. 
The International Energy Agency has meanwhile projected that global oil supply could decline by 5.7 million barrels per day in 2026, a larger contraction than previously expected.
Some Monday market analyses went further, warning that flows equivalent to nearly 30 million barrels a day — roughly 30% of global consumption — are either already disrupted or exposed to disruption. That figure should be treated as an estimate of supply at risk rather than barrels physically removed from the market.
The result is a tightening economic vise across the Western economies. Americans are paying record prices to move goods and heat homes; European households are entering winter with gas markets under renewed pressure; central banks are being pushed toward tighter monetary policy; and businesses face higher costs at precisely the moment consumers are becoming more cautious.
What began as an energy-market shock is therefore threatening to become a wider cost-of-living and economic-growth problem. 
With winter approaching, the central question for Washington and European capitals is increasingly whether energy supplies can stabilize before higher fuel and heating costs become embedded across the economies — and whether households already struggling with inflation can absorb another round of increases