The SNSC convened for a meeting chaired by President Masoud Pezeshkian on Saturday, at the end of which it was declared that the European states actions have suspended cooperation with IAEA.
During today’s SNSC meeting, the participants discussed and exchanged views on the situation in the region and the adventurism by the Zionist regime. Meanwhile, the Council stressed that the policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the current circumstances will be to cooperate as much as possible to establish peace and stability in the region.
The Council noted that despite Iran’s extensive collaboration with the IAEA and the presentation of constructive proposals to resolve outstanding issues, the European troika-the United Kingdom, France and Germany- acted recklessly in pursuing hostile measures. As a result, it was declared that “the path of cooperation with the Agency will be suspended.”
The decision is not only a defensive response but also a legitimate and lawful measure grounded in Iran’s sovereign rights. The Council underlined that Tehran’s commitment to the Cairo Agreement with the IAEA was always conditional: Iran would uphold its side of the accord only if no hostile steps were taken against it. By pursuing the snapback mechanism and other coercive moves, the Europeans have openly violated this precondition, leaving Iran with no choice but to suspend cooperation.
Officials stressed that this response should not be misinterpreted as Iran abandoning diplomacy. On the contrary, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been tasked to continue consultations in line with the Council’s decisions, but strictly on the basis of protecting the nation’s security and interests.
The statement further noted that the real responsibility for the breakdown in cooperation lies with the European governments, which have shown that they are unwilling or unable to maintain an independent and good-faith approach to diplomacy. Instead, they have followed Washington’s agenda, closing off avenues for dialogue.
Iranian officials emphasized that the move is entirely consistent with international law, since no agreement can bind one party while the other acts in bad faith. The snapback push, they added, is both illegitimate and destructive to global non-proliferation norms.
MNA
