While US-Israeli attacks hit key infrastructure, hardliners demand withdrawal from Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Tehran, Iran – Iranian politicians are pushing to exit the country from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as the United States and Israel ramp up their attacks to hit civilian nuclear sites, steel factories and a university.
It would be meaningless for Iran to remain a signatory to the international treaty as it “has had no benefit for us”, said Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for the national security commission of parliament, in a Friday night post on X.
Recommended Stories
list of 3 items- list 1 of 3The war on Iran faces a MAGA backlash
- list 2 of 3How the US and Israel are making the Islamic republic stronger
- list 3 of 3Iran warns neighbours not to let ‘enemies run the war’ from their land
Malek Shariati, a representative from Tehran, said that a priority piece of legislation has been uploaded in an online parliamentary portal and will be reviewed soon.
Politicians have not held any sessions since the start of the war on February 28.
According to Shariati, the legislation will withdraw Iran from the NPT, revoke a law that adopted nuclear restrictions linked with a now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, and “support a new international treaty with aligned countries [including Shanghai Cooperation Organization/BRICS] on developing peaceful nuclear technologies”.
Hardliners have previously demanded an NPT exit and a nuclear bomb in response to outside pressure.
If such a law is approved by the parliament, it would also have to be agreed by the Guardian Council – a powerful 12-member constitutional body, before being implemented by the government.
Iranian authorities continue to accuse the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of taking a politicised stance and being complicit in attacks against Iranian nuclear sites, charges the United Nations nuclear watchdog rejects.
Mohammad Mohkber, a senior adviser to the late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and a former first vice president under late President Ebrahim Raisi, said on Saturday that IAEA Director Rafael Grossi is a “partner in crime” in blood spilled during the current war and the 12-day war last June.
“His political reports about Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities, lack of condemnation for aggression against our nuclear facilities, and now encouraging the enemies to attack Iran’s nuclear sites, will bring the country to irrevocable decisions,” he warned, without elaborating.
Grossi told US broadcaster CBS News in an interview earlier this month that no war has the capability to totally destroy Iran’s nuclear programme, “unless it was nuclear war and you go for destruction unfathomable, which we hope will never be the case”.
Fada-Hossein Maleki, a member of the national security commission of Iran’s parliament, said on Saturday he believes that Grossi has acted as an “agitator” for months in order to please US President Donald Trump. He said the nuclear bomb comment “violates all international norms and constitutes a provocative act”.
Electricity, steel become targets
Israeli and US forces significantly intensified their attacks on Friday, in some cases destroying infrastructure that will have long-term repercussions for Iranians and the country’s beleaguered economy that is struggling with an energy crisis and inflation rates of about 70 percent.
Warplanes bombed a yellowcake facility in Yazd and the Khondab Heavy Water Complex near Arak, and so far, at least three projectiles have landed in the vicinity of the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, prompting IAEA warnings about the potential for a major radiological incident.
Heavy air strikes also pummelled Iran’s steel giants, namely the Mobarakeh complex in central Isfahan, and the Khuzestan complex in western Ahvaz. Production lines and power plants feeding them were targeted, prompting the Ahvaz complex to announce suspension of production until further notice on Saturday.
The companies form the backbone of Iran’s non-oil exports, and were projected to rack up billions of dollars in revenue at a time when Washington is also trying to choke off Iran’s oil exports. Thousands of jobs may be at stake after major damage to the sites.
The bombing came after Trump twice announced delays on launching destructive attacks against Iran’s power plants, which he said would last until April 6. He has also claimed that negotiations with Iran “are going very well” as the two sides present conflicting positions.
Tehran has undergone two of its most intense nights of bombing, with overnight strikes into Saturday lighting up the night sky orange and also leading to temporary power outages across multiple areas. Some citizens reported smelling strong odours left from the detonation of the powerful explosives in the morning in some areas.
But almost the entirety of Iran’s population of at least 90 million has been unable for one month to freely communicate its experience with the international community since the Islamic republic has completely blocked internet connectivity. Only an intranet is operational to offer some basic services and limit the flow of information to state-run outlets.
The internet was totally cut off for 20 days in January, when thousands of protesters were killed during nationwide demonstrations that the government blamed on “terrorists” backed by the US and Israel. The streets of Tehran and many cities across Iran are now filled with armed state forces who have strictly warned against further protests.
State media outlets also continue to release videos of “confessions” from Iranians, including one on Saturday showing a crying girl with a blurred-out face, who said she was apprehended after filming missile strikes from the window of her family home and sending the footage to foreign-based media.
According to videos circulating online and state media reports, one of the strikes that targeted the Iranian capital overnight was directed at the Iran University of Science and Technology.
Some reports said a centre carrying out satellite-related research activities was bombed, but the university only said “research and educational buildings” were attacked, which also disturbed civilians in nearby residential areas and a hospital, but inflicted no casualties.
More major air strikes have been reported over the past day in Karaj and Shahr-e Rey near Tehran, as well as in Yazd, Shiraz, Tabriz, Bushehr and a number of other cities.
Facts Only
Iranian politicians are advocating for withdrawal from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for Iran’s parliamentary national security commission, stated that remaining in the NPT has provided no benefit to Iran.
Malek Shariati, a Tehran representative, confirmed that legislation to exit the NPT has been introduced in parliament.
The proposed legislation would also revoke nuclear restrictions linked to the 2015 nuclear deal and support a new treaty with aligned countries, including BRICS.
Hardliners in Iran have previously called for NPT withdrawal and nuclear weapons development.
The U.S. and Israel have intensified attacks on Iranian infrastructure, including nuclear sites, steel factories, and a university.
Targets include the yellowcake facility in Yazd, the Khondab Heavy Water Complex near Arak, and areas near the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant.
Steel plants in Isfahan and Ahvaz were bombed, leading to production suspensions.
Iran has blocked internet access for a month, restricting communication with the outside world.
State forces have suppressed protests, and state media has aired "confessions" from detained individuals.
Iranian officials accuse the IAEA of bias and complicity in the attacks.
IAEA Director Rafael Grossi stated that only nuclear war could destroy Iran’s nuclear program.
Iranian lawmakers have criticized Grossi’s remarks as provocative.
Further airstrikes have been reported in Tehran, Karaj, Shahr-e Rey, Yazd, Shiraz, Tabriz, and Bushehr.
Executive Summary
Iranian politicians are pushing to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) amid escalating attacks by the U.S. and Israel on civilian infrastructure, including nuclear sites, steel factories, and a university. Ebrahim Rezaei, spokesman for Iran’s parliamentary national security commission, argued that remaining in the NPT has provided no benefit to Iran. Malek Shariati, a Tehran representative, confirmed that legislation to exit the NPT, revoke nuclear restrictions tied to the defunct 2015 nuclear deal, and pursue a new treaty with aligned nations (such as BRICS) has been introduced and will be reviewed soon. Hardliners have previously advocated for NPT withdrawal and nuclear weapons development in response to external pressure. The proposed law would require approval from the Guardian Council before implementation.
The U.S. and Israel have intensified airstrikes, targeting Iran’s yellowcake facility in Yazd, the Khondab Heavy Water Complex near Arak, and areas near the Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant, raising IAEA concerns about radiological risks. Steel plants in Isfahan and Ahvaz were also hit, disrupting production and threatening jobs. Meanwhile, Iran has blocked internet access for a month, limiting communication with the outside world, and state forces have suppressed protests. Iranian officials accuse the IAEA of bias and complicity in the attacks, with senior adviser Mohammad Mohkber calling IAEA Director Rafael Grossi a "partner in crime." Grossi has stated that only nuclear war could destroy Iran’s nuclear program, a comment Iranian lawmakers deemed provocative. The conflict has led to power outages, economic strain, and civilian disruptions, with further strikes reported in multiple cities.
Full Take
The strongest version of this narrative frames Iran as a victim of aggressive U.S.-Israeli military actions, justifying its potential withdrawal from the NPT as a defensive measure against perceived Western hypocrisy and hostility. The article highlights the economic and humanitarian toll of the strikes, emphasizing civilian suffering and the suppression of dissent. It also underscores Iranian officials' accusations against the IAEA, portraying the agency as complicit in the attacks. This narrative aligns with a broader pattern of framing Iran as a resistant force against Western imperialism, appealing to anti-interventionist sentiments.
However, the article exhibits several manipulation patterns. The framing of Iran’s potential NPT withdrawal as a direct response to "unprovoked" attacks omits context about Iran’s own nuclear ambitions and past violations of the treaty. The emotional exploitation of civilian suffering and economic hardship serves to rally domestic and international sympathy while deflecting scrutiny from Iran’s internal repression. The portrayal of the IAEA as a "partner in crime" without substantive evidence of its complicity in the attacks is a classic example of strawmanning and authority games, undermining trust in international institutions. Additionally, the lack of alternative perspectives—such as the U.S. and Israeli justifications for the strikes or the IAEA’s rebuttals—creates a false binary that obscures the complexity of the conflict.
The root cause of this narrative is a paradigm of siege mentality, where Iran positions itself as a besieged nation fighting for sovereignty against external aggression. This echoes historical patterns of revolutionary regimes consolidating power by externalizing blame and suppressing internal dissent. The implications for human agency are dire: civilians bear the brunt of the conflict, with limited access to information and no platform to challenge the state’s narrative. The second-order consequences include further isolation of Iran, potential nuclear proliferation, and escalation of regional tensions.
Bridge questions: What would it take for Iran to reconsider its NPT membership without external pressure? How might the international community address Iran’s security concerns while preventing nuclear escalation? What role does domestic political posturing play in Iran’s nuclear stance?
Counterstrike scan: If this were part of a coordinated influence campaign, the playbook would involve amplifying civilian suffering to justify radical policy shifts, demonizing international institutions, and suppressing dissent to control the narrative. The actual content aligns with this pattern, particularly in its one-sided framing and emotional appeals. However, the inclusion of specific legislative details and direct quotes from officials adds a layer of credibility that distinguishes it from pure propaganda. The absence of counter-perspectives is notable but not necessarily indicative of bad faith, as the article may simply reflect the limitations of its sources.
Patterns detected: ARC-0024 Ambiguity, ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey, ARC-0012 Authority Games