Aljazeera Panel Discussion, April 28, 2026
Mousavian
Seyed Hossein Mousavian argued that the credibility of the NPT has been severely undermined by double standards and the failure of nuclear-weapon states to fulfill their obligations. He emphasized four principal shortcomings: first, the nuclear powers have failed to meet their disarmament commitments under the treaty; second, they continue modernizing and expanding their arsenals; third, major powers maintain strategic relations with nuclear-armed states outside the NPT such as Israel, India, and Pakistan; and fourth, there is discriminatory treatment regarding peaceful nuclear technology. Mousavian noted that countries such as Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Japan, and the Netherlands enrich uranium without objection, while Iran faces demands for “zero enrichment” despite remaining within the NPT
He further argued that the U.S.–Israeli attacks on Iran’s safeguarded nuclear facilities represented a clear violation of international law, the UN Charter, and the principles of the IAEA. He stressed that Iran’s nuclear program has remained under IAEA safeguards and that neither the IAEA nor the UNSC condemned the attacks, reinforcing the perception that the NPT is increasingly being used as a political instrument rather than an impartial legal framework.
Mousavian stated that many Iranian decision-makers now see NPT membership itself as an existential vulnerability. He noted that since 2003, both IAEA reports and U.S. intelligence assessments have consistently found no evidence that Iran had decided to build nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, Iran was subjected to severe sanctions, military attacks, and coercive pressure even while diplomacy was advancing and agreements appeared within reach in both 2025 and 2026. He contrasted Iran’s experience with North Korea, arguing that Tehran increasingly believes countries possessing nuclear weapons are less likely to face military attack.
He also emphasized that Iran had accepted the JCPOA—the most comprehensive nonproliferation agreement in history—and implemented it fully under unprecedented inspection mechanisms. According to Mousavian, Iran became the most inspected country in the history of the IAEA, with a substantial share of the agency’s resources devoted to monitoring its nuclear activities.
On regional security, Mousavian supported the idea of a subregional nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Persian Gulf within a broader framework for regional security and cooperation. He argued that such a framework should address maritime security, regional crises, and broader confidence-building measures. At the same time, he maintained that Israel’s undeclared nuclear arsenal and the policy of preserving Israeli nuclear monopoly in the Middle East remain the central obstacles to establishing a regional WMD-free zone.
Tariq Rauf
Tariq Rauf argued that the NPT system is facing one of its gravest crises since its creation. He warned that the collapse of arms control agreements between the United States and Russia, renewed nuclear competition among major powers, and growing geopolitical tensions have deepened the divide between nuclear and non-nuclear states. He described the attacks on Iran’s safeguarded nuclear facilities as a major blow to the credibility of the IAEA verification system and warned that such actions could encourage proliferation rather than prevent it.
Rauf also stressed that Israel’s undeclared nuclear arsenal remains a major source of instability in the Middle East. He advocated renewed efforts to establish a Middle East nuclear-weapon-free zone and argued that Western powers have long shielded Israel’s nuclear program from international scrutiny.
Kelsey Davenport
Kelsey Davenport emphasized that the NPT remains the cornerstone of the global nonproliferation system, but warned that trust in the treaty is steadily eroding. She argued that the review conference must not only reaffirm support for the treaty but also confront the broader consequences of declining confidence in arms control and disarmament. According to Davenport, if states conclude that the NPT no longer provides security benefits or a credible path toward disarmament, more countries may seek nuclear weapons as protection against coercion.
On regional security, Davenport supported efforts toward a Middle East nuclear-weapon-free zone but suggested that a more practical approach might begin with a narrower Gulf-focused security dialogue involving Iran and Arab states. She argued that addressing the underlying security concerns driving proliferation pressures could eventually create conditions for broader regional nuclear restraints and transparency measures.