Iran too is re-entering a sanctions regime, as the controversial snapback sanctions come into effect Sunday local time, amid rising violence in the region. These sanctions are part of a larger global movement and grave concern about the state of Iran’s nuclear program. Western powers, led by the US and European countries, have vigorously condemned Iran’s alleged attempts to develop nuclear weapons. This allegation has led to a resurgence of attention to Iran’s nuclear program.
These snapback sanctions were a result of the U.S. pulling out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). This ruling came under former President Donald Trump’s administration. This withdrawal was followed by a “maximum pressure” policy towards Iran. It led to biting economic sanctions targeting Iran’s key economic sectors—including oil and financial services.
Historical Context of Sanctions
Since the U.S. exit from the JCPOA, Iran had increasingly been under the pressure of the international sanctions. The European states party to that agreement have now acted to trigger such sanctions’ restoration through the agreement’s snapback mechanism. They are jointly pressing for renewed direct discussions between Iran and the United States. Through this implementation, the goal is to address the long-standing issues related to Iran’s nuclear aspirations.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Sunday reiterated Tehran’s rejection of exiting the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). This decision flies in the face of continued sanctions. He said, “They close the road with the ‘snapback.’ What really opens or creates the road is the mind and the imagination.” Iran has no choice but to face the international community’s incredible pressures head on. It needs to meet its obligations under international treaties in the process.
The multifaceted nature of Iran’s nuclear program has increased pressure from many international players. Iran continues to insist that its nuclear program is purely peaceful. Western powers and Israel are fighting to undermine this claim.
Response to Sanctions
Iranian officials have made responses to the snapback sanctions. They’ve suggested a significant shift in their collaboration with international agencies that regulate nuclear operations. In response, Iranian officials threatened that if the snapback were to be implemented, Tehran would withdraw from IAEA inspections. The stakes couldn’t be higher and the pressure is increasing.
In response, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi denounced the snapback sanctions as a “stark abuse of process” when first invoked by France, Germany and the United Kingdom. I am appalled that you took such action. This further emphasizes, even in the face of renewed sanctions, Iran’s continued defiance and disdain for their desire to give in to outside pressures.
The economic ramifications of these sanctions are in many ways just beginning to emerge. The ECFR further pointed out that UN and EU sanctions could be used to affect Iran’s behavior. They argue that the weight of the deep U.S. restrictions will likely cancel out any impact from Europe.
Current Situation and Future Implications
As tensions rise, the state of critical equipment at Iran’s Isfahan facility—responsible for enriching uranium to weapons-grade and converting it from gas to metal—remains uncertain. Since June, international inspectors have had difficulty accessing Iranian sites due to the continued fighting. This raises enormous alarm bells about Iran’s nuclear activities transparency.
Iran’s move was a major diplomatic victory for Tehran, recalling its envoys to Paris, Berlin and London. This decision is a direct response to the reimposition of the sanctions. This withdrawal signals a cooling of diplomatic relations and highlights Tehran’s frustration with European nations attempting to leverage sanctions for negotiations.
The European trio’s foreign ministers issued a joint statement expressing their concern over Iran’s advancing nuclear program. First, they very explicitly called upon Iran and all countries to implement in full these UN resolutions. They stress that they had no choice but to activate the snapback procedure. For them, the motivation to act was strong due to what they saw as violations on the part of Iran.
