Senior Iranian diplomat says we are considering withdrawing from the NPT; The Lebanese case is an integral part of any possible future agreement, Tasnim reports

Threats to leave the NPT have been a recurring Iranian pressure lever in past rounds of nuclear escalation, typically deployed when sanctions pressure or strikes on nuclear infrastructure narrow the diplomatic room, and in prior episodes they have tended to stop short of formal notification, since withdrawal requires a notice period and would strip the legal cover Iran has historically used for its programme. The pairing with Lebanon is the more substantive signal: tying Hezbollah's file into any future agreement widens the negotiating table beyond enrichment and sanctions relief, a linkage that in past regional diplomacy has slowed or collapsed talks rather than broadened them. The actors matter: Tasnim reflects the hardline security establishment, so the message reads as positioning from that wing rather than the foreign ministry's track, and the distinction between the two has historically told where actual policy sits. The transmission channel for crude runs through risk premium on the front of the oil curve and freight and insurance costs in the Gulf rather than immediate supply, since physical flows have rarely been interrupted in comparable rhetorical episodes. Worth watching is whether IAEA access or enrichment levels shift alongside the rhetoric, whether other officials repeat the NPT language, and how the Lebanese condition is received by the counterparties, since linkage demands of this kind have previously been the point where frameworks stall.