New York, IRNA – Iran has warned that it could legally withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (N.P.T.) if European signatories to a 2015 nuclear agreement proceed with efforts to reinstate United Nations sanctions against the country.
In a formal letter to the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday, Iran’s Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations in New York Saeed Iravani reiterated the Islamic Republic’s previous warnings that it would take “proportionate responses,” including by “starting the process of withdrawal from the NPT in accordance with Article X of the Treaty.”
The warning comes as Britain, France, and Germany—collectively known as the E3—are pressing for a vote on a resolution they, along with the United States, have tabled against Iran at the International Atomic Energy Agency (I.A.E.A.) Board of Governors in Vienna. The vote had initially been scheduled for Wednesday but was postponed to Thursday due to time constraints, according to diplomatic sources in Vienna.
The motion, based on a recent I.A.E.A. report, accuses Iran of failing to cooperate with the U.N. nuclear watchdog over alleged “undeclared nuclear activities.” If adopted, the resolution could pave the way for the reimposition of U.N. sanctions—lifted under the nuclear accord known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—by October, when key provisions of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231, which endorsed the agreement, are set to expire.
Iranian officials have dismissed the I.A.E.A.’s findings as “politically motivated” and reliant on intelligence from hostile sources, including the Israeli regime. They accuse the E3 of weaponizing the “snapback mechanism,” a provision in the JCPOA that allows for the automatic reinstatement of U.N. sanctions on Iran if it is found to be in non-compliance with the agreement, to pressure Tehran as it negotiates with the U.S. for a potential replacement to the deal, which was unilaterally abandoned by Washington in 2018.
In a joint statement this week, the E3—while emphasizing their commitment to diplomacy—signaled they were prepared to act if Iran was found in breach of its so-called Safeguards obligations under the N.P.T. “Absent a satisfying deal, the E3 will consider triggering the snapback mechanism to address threats to international peace and security.”
In his letter to the Security Council, Iravani condemned the push by the E3 as a “legally baseless and politically reckless act, with profoundly destabilizing consequences for regional and international peace and security.”
The following is the full text of the letter:
Excellency,
I am writing to you in response to the joint letter dated 9 June 2025 from the Permanent Representatives of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom (the “E3”) concerning the implementation of the Security Council resolution 2231 (2015) and the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). That letter, regrettably, reflects yet another instance of the E3 attempting to shift blame and deflect attention from their own persistent and well-documented failures to uphold their obligations, while levelling baseless and politically motivated accusations against the Islamic Republic of Iran. In this regard, I wish to bring the following points to your attention and that of the members of the Security Council:
The Islamic Republic of Iran categorically rejects the allegations contained in the letter, which ignore the critical context and misrepresent the reality of the JCPOA's current status, the circumstances surrounding Iran's nuclear programme, and the responsibilities of the parties to the agreement. The E3’s assertions are not only factually misleading but also legally unsound and politically biased.
As Iran has consistently emphasized, its remedial measures have not occurred in a vacuum, but rather in direct response to the United States' unlawful withdrawal from the JCPOA in May 2018, and the E3’s subsequent failure to fulfil their essential obligations under the agreement, most notably with regard to the promised economic normalization. These E3 breaches effectively nullified the reciprocal balance of the deal, prompting Iran's responses in full accordance with its rights under the JCPOA. Iran began gradually reducing its commitments under the JCPOA in 2019, over a full year after the U.S. withdrawal, in full accordance with its explicit rights, which asserted that should the US and EU/E3 re-introduce sanctions, Iran “will treat such a re-introduction or re-imposition of the sanctions specified in Annex II, or such an imposition of new nuclear-related sanctions, as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part”. Iran's nuclear-related commitments were balanced with economic dividends, which totally diminished due to the US withdrawal and re-imposition of sanctions, along with the EU/E3's failure to uphold their commitments. Thus, Iran's reversible remedial measures were legal and proportionate.
The E3’s letter selectively highlights and exaggerates aspects of the latest IAEA reports. Iran's nuclear programme remains entirely peaceful, with all enrichment activities conducted under one of the most rigorous verification and monitoring frameworks established by the IAEA. It must be emphasized that as long as nuclear activities remain under IAEA safeguards and supervision, there is no legitimate cause for concern. Importantly, there is no restriction on the level of enrichment itself; the critical limitation lies solely in preventing the diversion of nuclear material or activities toward non-peaceful purposes. As recently as 31 May 2025, the IAEA Director General asserted that “safeguarded enrichment activities are not forbidden in and of themselves”. Our position and action proved that, as an NPT Member, the Islamic Republic of Iran is not seeking to develop or acquire nuclear weapons and continues to abide by its CSA obligations. Furthermore, the term “Significant Quantity” (SQ), used by the IAEA, is neither technically nor legally a credible assessment regarding weaponization. According to the Agency's 2024 Safeguards Implementation Report (SIR), there were 240530 SQ of nuclear material under safeguards. Claims that Iran possesses between 7 to 9 SQs (compare this number to 250530)—while all such material remains under continuous IAEA monitoring—are both misleading and diversionary. It is important to emphasize that the IAEA has repeatedly confirmed that it has found no evidence indicating any diversion of nuclear material toward non-peaceful purposes in Iran. Any attempt to suggest otherwise not only misrepresents the Agency's findings but also undermines its independent and professional mandate.
The E3’s attempt to conflate JCPOA provisions with Iran's obligations under its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (CSA) is disingenuous. Iran has consistently cooperated with the Agency and has engaged constructively, including under the March 2023 Joint Statement with the IAEA. Iran remains fully committed to its NPT obligations and continues to implement its CSA. The E3’s deliberate blurring of legal frameworks serves only to politicize the technical work of the Agency. In this framework, Iran's remedial measures were neither in breach of the JCPOA, nor the NPT and CSA obligations of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Those measures cannot justify the EU/E3 and the US’ decisions that totally hollowed out the JCPOA, and cannot form a basis for the EU/E3 to launch DRM or refuse to fulfil their obligations.
The E3’s acquiescence to unlawful U.S. sanctions, and their inaction following the U.S. withdrawal, their refusal to implement their commitments on Transition Day, the re-imposition of lifted sanctions, and their introduction of new unlawful restrictive measures all constitute clear and continuing violations of both the JCPOA and resolution 2231. Having failed to honour their own commitments, the E3 have no legal or moral standing to invoke the Dispute Resolution Mechanism (DRM), let alone threaten the use of the snapback provision. Such a move would be procedurally invalid, substantively flawed, and politically irresponsible. A party in material breach of an agreement cannot invoke its benefits—a principle well established in international law.
The claim that E3 has recursed and exhausted the DRM process in 2020 is simply false. Furthermore, the E3’s threat to “trigger the snapback mechanism” in the absence of “a satisfying deal” runs counter to the purpose of the Mechanism. DRM is designed to safeguard the deal, and not to be abused against another Participant to accept a separate deal to the satisfaction of a group of Participants, who themselves are in breach of the JCPOA.
The insinuation that Iranian officials have advocated for nuclear weapons or altered the country's defensive doctrine is utterly baseless and reflects a deliberate attempt to manufacture a crisis. Iran's nuclear policy is unequivocally peaceful, rooted in both legal commitments under the NPT and a deeply held religious and strategic defensive doctrine prohibiting weapons of mass destruction. This policy has been consistently reaffirmed by the highest authorities of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The Islamic Republic of Iran remains committed to finding a negotiated solution that addresses concerns, both pertaining to the nuclear matters and the sanctions that have unjustly targeted the well-being of the Iranian people. In this spirit, Iran has seriously engaged in diplomatic talks with the EU/E3 as well as the U.S. in recent months. Iran resumed talks with the E3 on the sidelines of the 79th session of the UNGA in 2024, even before entering into indirect talks with the U.S. It is with utmost regret that the E3 has responded to Iran's goodwill and seriousness in the negotiations not only with a threat to trigger snapback, but also by raising unrealistic demands which go far beyond the JCPOA terms and scope. In real terms, the E3 is trying to leverage a JCPOA-embedded mechanism to extract new concessions from Iran. That totally runs against the minimum required goodwill for a diplomatic process. As Iran continues discussions with the US and, in parallel, with the E3, any attempt or threat of snapback, which in itself is null and void, is a flagrant disregard for Iran's goodwill and will have serious negative ramifications.
If the E3 is truly interested in a diplomatic resolution, they must abandon the unrealistic approach and respect the sovereign rights of States under international law. The true threat to international peace and security lies not in Iran's peaceful nuclear activities, but in the continued resort to illegal and unilateral coercive actions in flagrant violation of international law and the UN Charter, the erosion of multilateralism and rule of law, and
the instrumentalization of international organizations, in particular the IAEA, for a narrow political agenda. The E3’s threats to invoke the snapback mechanism as political leverage, despite their own non-performance, flagrantly contradict the principle of pacta sunt servanda and would seriously undermine the authority and credibility of the Security Council.
Iran firmly warns that any attempt to reinstate the terminated provisions of the previous UNSC Resolutions would be a legally baseless and politically reckless act, with profoundly destabilizing consequences for regional and international peace and security. The E3, having failed to uphold their own JCPOA obligations, have no legal standing to invoke this mechanism. An attempt to abuse the DRM and the mechanisms embedded in UNSCR 2231 not only erodes the credibility of the UN Security Council but will also seriously undermine the non-proliferation regime. The Islamic Republic of Iran has made it clear on all occasions, including through formal communications to E3 officials, that in the case that the mechanism to re-instate the terminated UNSC Resolutions is triggered, Iran would consider proportionate responses, including starting the process of withdrawal from the NPT in accordance with the Article X of the Treaty. In such a scenario, the responsibility for the consequences of such a shift will rest squarely with those who seek to misuse international mechanisms for narrow political ends. The Security Council must prevent this dangerous course of action and uphold the integrity of resolution 2231.
As the Security Council approaches the Termination Day of Resolution 2231, all efforts must align with Resolution, and it is imperative that this august body reaffirm its unwavering commitment to the principles of sovereign equality, good faith in treaty implementation, and the protection of the integrity of both Resolution 2231 and the United Nations Charter. In this context, Iran calls on the Secretary-General and all Security Council members to reject the E3’s selective and legally unsound narrative and its misuse of these instruments. Iran further urges the E3 to reconsider their counterproductive policy of pressure and confrontation and to instead embrace meaningful dialogue aimed at restoring trust.
A sustainable diplomatic solution can only be achieved through mutual respect, strict adherence to international law, and negotiation in good faith. In recent months, and upon expression of readiness by the U.S., Iran has engaged in several rounds of indirect negotiations with the United States under which Iran took a realistic, constructive, and workable approach.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is committed to finding a negotiated solution that provides enough assurances regarding the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, and at the same time recognizes and respects Iran's sovereign rights under NPT and international law, while removing unjust sanctions against the Iranian nation in a verifiable and enduring manner. From our perspective, an agreement to that end is within reach and could be achieved rapidly, if there is genuine political will.
3266**4353
Your Comment