Both developed and developing nations increasingly see peaceful nuclear technology as essential for achieving long-term energy security and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This shift is recognised in international frameworks which support the expansion of clean energy options.
The peaceful use of nuclear energy is enshrined as an ‘inalienable right’ under Article IV of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). This provision affirms the right of all state parties to research, produce and use nuclear energy for civilian purposes, “without discrimination” and in conformity with the treaty’s other articles. However, this right is conditional. It is tied to compliance with non-proliferation obligations and safeguards established by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Iran’s pursuit of nuclear energy remains within its legal rights under international law, and it has consistently accepted IAEA oversight. In this regard, the unprovoked attacks by Israel and the US on Iranian nuclear infrastructure is an unlawful use of force which undermines the international legal order and reinforces the perception of a double standard in global non-proliferation enforcement.
Iran has been a party to the NPT since 1970 as a non-nuclear weapon state and has remained a party even after the 1979 Revolution. It has long maintained that its nuclear programme is exclusively for peaceful purposes, such as electricity generation and scientific development. Under the NPT, this right is protected, provided Iran does not develop nuclear weapons and adheres to IAEA safeguards.
Over the past two decades, Iran has allowed IAEA inspectors access to its nuclear facilities, albeit with periods of tension and partial suspension. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed in 2015, marked a significant diplomatic achievement. Iran agreed to restrict its enrichment program, reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium, and open its facilities to rigorous inspections in return for sanctions relief.
On the other hand, Iran’s intentions have been questioned and it has been criticized for lack of transparency regarding its nuclear programme. But, no conclusive evidence of a nuclear weapons programme has ever been found by the IAEA. Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy remains intact unless concrete violations indicate proliferation intent. So far, Iran’s breaches have related to non-disclosure, not weapons development and it has consistently expressed willingness to engage diplomatically.
While Iran is held to account under the NPT and IAEA mechanisms, Israel is not even a party to the NPT. It is widely believed to possess an undeclared nuclear arsenal, yet remains outside the formal non-proliferation regime.
The airstrikes by Israel on June 13, 2025 and by the US on June 22, 2025 were carried out without UNSC authorisation and outside of any self-defence justification. This represents a clear violation of Article 2(4) of the UN Charter, which prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state. The attacks conducted by Israel also raise concerns under international humanitarian law, especially given reports that they impacted civilian infrastructure, including hospitals and power grids. The principles of
proportionality and distinction, cornerstones of the law of armed conflict, may have been violated, especially since Iran’s facilities are under IAEA monitoring.
The attack sets a dangerous precedent. It suggests that a state outside the NPT, like Israel, can unilaterally bomb a country that is legally exercising its treaty rights, thereby further weakening trust in the international legal system. While Iran has faced legitimate scrutiny for its transparency failures, it has not been found in violation of Article II of the NPT,
and its facilities remain subject to IAEA oversight.
The airstrikes on Iranian nuclear, military and civilian infrastructure by Israel and the US, conducted without legal justification or international mandate, violate fundamental norms of international law and undermines efforts at peaceful conflict resolution.
This reflects a broader problem within the global nuclear governance regime: the unequal treatment of states and the weakening of legal norms in favour of power politics. If the international community is committed to rules-based order and climate-conscious energy solutions, it must defend the legal rights of all states under the NPT, including Iran’s, and hold any state accountable for breaches of international law.
The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad.
