A senior Iranian parliamentarian has called on Tehran to develop nuclear weapons, marking a dramatic escalation in the rhetoric of the Islamic Republic’s hardline leadership and signaling a possible shift in the country’s nuclear policy. The declaration, delivered during a session of Iran’s Majles, reflects the growing dominance of fundamentalist factions within the regime and highlights mounting regional tensions as Iran faces off against Israel and Western governments over its sponsorship of terrorism and nuclear ambitions.
The announcement came as Mohammad Reza Sabbaghian leveraged his time on the Majles floor to denounce colleagues who previously supported diplomatic negotiations with former U.S. President Donald Trump. Sabbaghian insisted that the “most important” takeaway for the regime was to abandon talks in favor of pursuing a nuclear arsenal, openly stating that negotiations betrayed Iran’s interests and security. This position, delivered before the Iranian parliament and broadcast to the public, represents the most explicit call yet from within the political establishment for Iran to weaponize its uranium enrichment program.
Regional Implications and Heightened Threats
The lawmaker’s statement is emblematic of a more confrontational stance adopted by Tehran since the October 7th massacre, when Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists carried out the deadliest attack on Jews since the Holocaust. Since that watershed moment, Iran’s leadership has increasingly rejected diplomatic engagement, instead intensifying its efforts to destabilize the region through proxies and arming its terror allies across multiple fronts. Israel, compelled by existential threats, has responded with a broad military campaign targeting Iranian-backed groups in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, as part of a wider war against the so-called “axis of resistance” orchestrated by Tehran.
Sabbaghian’s message—the most forthright from a parliamentarian to date—reflects an emboldened Iranian leadership that is less interested in managing Western perceptions than in signaling resolve to its domestic base and regional allies. This rhetoric has become increasingly common in Tehran, as decision-making power consolidates under Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the primary vehicle for Iran’s foreign and security policy.
Shift in Regime’s Strategic Calculus
For years, Iran’s leadership maintained public ambiguity over its nuclear program, claiming peaceful intent even as Western intelligence and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) documented repeated violations and secret activities. The hardliner-dominated parliament, however, now openly discusses weaponization, shattering the pretense that Iran remains committed to nonproliferation goals. This is not merely posturing: the IRGC’s expanding control over parliament and strategic ministries further reduces the influence of pragmatists who previously sought compromise with Europe and the U.S.
The timing of Sabbaghian’s defiance is noteworthy. Diplomatic efforts to revive the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement have stalled, leaving Iran free to expand uranium enrichment far beyond agreed limits, deploy advanced centrifuges, and restrict international inspections at critical facilities such as Natanz and Fordow. Western officials warn that Iran is now only weeks away from crossing the threshold required to produce weapons-grade fissile material—a development that would mark a turning point in one of the world’s most vexing security crises.
Strategic Dilemma for Israel and the West
Israel views a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat, repeatedly warning that it will not allow the regime to acquire such capability. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and successive Israeli governments have maintained a policy of credible military threat, backed by overt and covert operations targeting the Iranian nuclear program. These efforts have slowed Iran’s progress but have not fundamentally altered Tehran’s ambitions.
The United States has pledged to support Israel’s security, but its ability to deter Iranian escalation is complicated by domestic divisions, European reluctance to impose harsher sanctions, and competing global crises. Sunni Arab states—including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the UAE—watch closely, recognizing that Iranian nuclearization would disrupt the region’s fragile balance of power and might trigger a broader nuclear arms race.
Context: Iran’s Regional Campaign of Violence and Subversion
Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons cannot be separated from its broader campaign to destabilize the Middle East. The IRGC, designated a terrorist organization by the U.S., orchestrates a network of proxies—Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and Shia militias in Iraq and Syria. These groups have carried out attacks against Israeli, Western, and Arab interests, deepening the sense of crisis and pushing the limits of containment.
The October 7th massacre, planned and executed with Iranian assistance, served both as a declaration of capability and intent by Tehran’s network. Israel’s military operations since then—focused on dismantling Hamas and disrupting Iran’s other proxies—are part of a broader strategy to confront Iran’s expansionism and prevent further massacres. The escalation in Iran’s nuclear rhetoric adds another layer of urgency to these campaigns.
Domestic Factors: Regime Survival and Internal Divisions
Inside Iran, the parliament is increasingly a platform for hardliners to articulate regime priorities. Despite economic hardship, international sanctions, and widespread public discontent, the ruling elite perceives nuclear weapons as a safeguard not only against external threats but also potential domestic upheaval. Protests in recent years have rattled the regime but have been met with brutal repression, further polarizing the political landscape.
While some voices inside the regime still advocate for engagement with the West, their influence continues to wane. The fusion of IRGC interests and political authority has created a ruling structure less susceptible to compromise and more hostile to international norms. Public declarations like Sabbaghian’s are both a reflection of this shift and a message of defiance to adversaries at home and abroad.
International Nonproliferation Efforts Face Collapse
The open push for nuclear arms in Iran’s parliament poses a grave challenge to decades of nonproliferation efforts. Any move by Iran to achieve nuclear breakout would encourage a regional arms race and undermine the credibility of the IAEA and the global nonproliferation regime. Western officials, already concerned about Iran’s violations, now warn of catastrophic consequences should Tehran proceed down this path unimpeded.
Conclusion
Sabbaghian’s call for nuclear weaponization is a clarion warning to the international community. As the Iranian regime embraces open confrontation with Israel and rejects Western diplomatic engagement, the risks of a nuclear-armed Iran grow more acute. In the words of Israeli officials, the world can no longer rely on deterrence and dialogue alone; a concerted international response—rooted in action as well as rhetoric—is now imperative to prevent a new era of nuclear instability and regional war.
