The decision by France, Germany, and the United Kingdom—known collectively as the E3—to trigger the “snapback” mechanism and reimpose United Nations sanctions on Iran, marks a further breakdown in diplomatic efforts to contain Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
The move, which became effective today, restores sanctions that had been suspended for a decade under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), more commonly referred to as the landmark nuclear deal.
A race against time
The E3 argued they had “no choice” but to act, citing Iran’s continued nuclear escalation and its repeated failure to comply with the JCPOA. European negotiators had earlier informed the UN Security Council that Tehran had violated almost all of its commitments.
The timing was significant: the sanctions were due to expire permanently in October, so the mechanism was invoked before that date. Another factor was the need to complete the process before Russia assumed the presidency of the Security Council next month.
The snapback mechanism was designed to be veto-proof, ensuring that opposition from Russia or China could not block it. Despite several rounds of high-level meetings this month, including sessions with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, negotiations collapsed.
Europe’s central demands included evidence that Iran was prepared to seek a diplomatic settlement, full cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and clarification of its stockpile of highly enriched uranium (which exceeds 400kg). An agreement reached between the IAEA and Tehran on resuming inspections was judged too vague by European diplomats.
Iran pushes back
Iran’s reaction was swift as it recalled ambassadors from London, Paris, and Berlin. President Masoud Pezeshkian condemned the decision as unfair and illegal, while Araghchi dismissed it as an abuse of process. Pezeshkian insisted Iran would never pursue nuclear weapons and accused Washington of pressuring its European partners into refusing compromise.
Middle East on edge
The return of sanctions comes against a backdrop of heightened Middle Eastern tension. Earlier this year, Israel carried out a 12-day assault on Iran, supported by US airstrikes on major facilities, including Fordow and Natanz. These strikes are believed to have set back Iran’s nuclear programme by as much as two years, although the state of much of the infrastructure remains uncertain. Araghchi even suggested that large quantities of enriched uranium could be buried beneath rubble.
Since the US unilaterally abandoned the JCPOA in 2018 under President Donald Trump, Iran has expanded its enrichment programme steadily. It now produces uranium enriched to 60 per cent—close to the 90 per cent required for weapons-grade material—and possesses a stockpile sufficient for several bombs if it chose to take that step. Iran has also restricted IAEA monitoring, particularly after the June conflict.
Israel has urged against any delay in tightening pressure on Tehran, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hinting that his government would be prepared to strike again if necessary.
The E3 warned Iran to avoid escalation, but some officials in Tehran had previously threatened that the snapback might push the country to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which would end all international oversight.
Pezeshkian has since indicated Iran has no intention of leaving the treaty, though he demanded assurances that Israeli attacks would not continue. Analysts caution that reduced cooperation with the IAEA could heighten the risk of miscalculation and provide justification for further strikes by Israel or the United States.
Impact of the UN snapback sanctions
The sanctions restored by the UN cover a wide range of sectors, including an arms embargo, restrictions on ballistic missile technology and limits on oil exports and financial services. The decision brings Europe closer to the long-standing American policy of maximum pressure on Tehran. Washington welcomed the E3’s move as a sign of decisive leadership.
The global response, however, remains divided. China and Russia—both signatories to the JCPOA and longstanding partners of Iran—have refused to recognise the sanctions. Moscow described the snapback as illegitimate and accused Europe of setting a trap, while Beijing continues to buy Iranian oil in defiance of US demands.
The reimposition of sanctions would have a devastating effect on the Iranian economy, which is already strained by years of US sanctions. The alarming fall in value of the Iranian currency has pushed up the prices of rice, meat and dairy, leaving many families impoverished.
Growing economic woes and the fear of renewed conflict (like the one in June) have intensified psychological strain across society. The situation has been further exacerbated by a wave of governmental repression. Reports from Iran say death sentences have gone up to levels not witnessed in decades.
Although the sanctions have been reinstated, both the E3 and Washington insist that diplomacy remains an option. Yet, reversing snapback sanctions would require consensus at the Security Council, making any such move extremely difficult.
The E3 maintain that they will continue to pursue negotiations to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, but the latest developments underline the deepening crisis surrounding Tehran’s programme.
