Iran’s window of time is closing as the E3 states (Britain, France, Germany) move to implement their decision to activate the “snapback” mechanism of the UN sanctions. This clause, which is set to expire on October 18, allows any state party to the nuclear agreement (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA) to reinstate sanctions if Iran is deemed non-compliant with the agreement’s requirements and without a new vote (thus preventing a veto). Such a move would reimpose the global arms embargo, restrictions on missiles, and other measures that were lifted in 2015.
Contacts between Iran and the Europeans on this issue have taken place over the past six months, alongside rounds of talks held between Iran and the United States prior to the Israeli and American strike on Iran’s nuclear program this past June. The Europeans’ demand was aligned with that of the Americans, namely that Iran renounce uranium enrichment on its territory. In the initial contacts, Tehran threatened that if the snapback mechanism was activated, it would take severe retaliatory measures, including threats to enrich to military levels and/or to leave the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Today, after the heavy blow to its nuclear program, Iran’s “toolbox” is rather empty. In recent days, Tehran has raised the idea of selectively closing the Strait of Hormuz to ships of the United States and the three European countries, a move that could drive up oil prices, which, according to Tehran’s assessment, would cause concern in the United States.
Ahead of the deadline set for Iran at the end of the month, the Iranian foreign minister is conducting intensive contacts. In recent talks, the Europeans expressed a willingness to extend the deadline for activating the snapback mechanism by six months, on the condition that Iran resume negotiations with Washington and allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). At this stage, Iran refuses to support an extension of the snapback deadline and demands its expiration, while asserting that the Europeans lack both the legal and moral authority (given their support for the Israeli–American military strike) to activate it. Meanwhile, Iran is counting on the support of Russia and China. Indeed, both have aligned with Tehran in statements by the Russian foreign minister and Russia’s representative at the IAEA, expressing clear support for Iran. China even submitted a letter to the UN Security Council opposing the move and warning that renewed sanctions could have “catastrophic and unpredictable” consequences.
Iranian policy is subject to sharp political dispute between those who, reluctantly, support suspending enrichment and renewing dialogue with the United States as the only way to prevent the deterioration of Iran’s economic situation and the looming threat of renewed military confrontation with Israel, and the conservatives, led by Supreme Leader Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, who refuse to yield to a demand they were unwilling to accept even before the war. In the coming days, the Iranians and the Europeans are scheduled to meet in Vienna (August 26) for decisive talks. Without a significant Iranian concession, the Europeans will be forced to advance the process of reinstating UN sanctions, which would worsen Iran’s economic situation, undermine prospects for restoring IAEA supervision of nuclear sites and enriched material, and further exacerbate military tensions in the region.
Iran’s window of time is closing as the E3 states (Britain, France, Germany) move to implement their decision to activate the “snapback” mechanism of the UN sanctions. This clause, which is set to expire on October 18, allows any state party to the nuclear agreement (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA) to reinstate sanctions if Iran is deemed non-compliant with the agreement’s requirements and without a new vote (thus preventing a veto). Such a move would reimpose the global arms embargo, restrictions on missiles, and other measures that were lifted in 2015.
Contacts between Iran and the Europeans on this issue have taken place over the past six months, alongside rounds of talks held between Iran and the United States prior to the Israeli and American strike on Iran’s nuclear program this past June. The Europeans’ demand was aligned with that of the Americans, namely that Iran renounce uranium enrichment on its territory. In the initial contacts, Tehran threatened that if the snapback mechanism was activated, it would take severe retaliatory measures, including threats to enrich to military levels and/or to leave the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Today, after the heavy blow to its nuclear program, Iran’s “toolbox” is rather empty. In recent days, Tehran has raised the idea of selectively closing the Strait of Hormuz to ships of the United States and the three European countries, a move that could drive up oil prices, which, according to Tehran’s assessment, would cause concern in the United States.
Ahead of the deadline set for Iran at the end of the month, the Iranian foreign minister is conducting intensive contacts. In recent talks, the Europeans expressed a willingness to extend the deadline for activating the snapback mechanism by six months, on the condition that Iran resume negotiations with Washington and allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). At this stage, Iran refuses to support an extension of the snapback deadline and demands its expiration, while asserting that the Europeans lack both the legal and moral authority (given their support for the Israeli–American military strike) to activate it. Meanwhile, Iran is counting on the support of Russia and China. Indeed, both have aligned with Tehran in statements by the Russian foreign minister and Russia’s representative at the IAEA, expressing clear support for Iran. China even submitted a letter to the UN Security Council opposing the move and warning that renewed sanctions could have “catastrophic and unpredictable” consequences.
Iranian policy is subject to sharp political dispute between those who, reluctantly, support suspending enrichment and renewing dialogue with the United States as the only way to prevent the deterioration of Iran’s economic situation and the looming threat of renewed military confrontation with Israel, and the conservatives, led by Supreme Leader Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, who refuse to yield to a demand they were unwilling to accept even before the war. In the coming days, the Iranians and the Europeans are scheduled to meet in Vienna (August 26) for decisive talks. Without a significant Iranian concession, the Europeans will be forced to advance the process of reinstating UN sanctions, which would worsen Iran’s economic situation, undermine prospects for restoring IAEA supervision of nuclear sites and enriched material, and further exacerbate military tensions in the region.