Iran’s talks with ...
Page 1
Sanctions return and what lies ahead
Should the snapback proceed, all prior Security Council resolutions—1696, 1737, 1747, 1803, 1835 and 1929—will be restored. For Iran, this would not just be a diplomatic setback: it would deepen economic suffering, disrupt foreign trade, tighten export‑import channels—especially in oil and energy—and hamper investment, banking, insurance and transit sectors.
The return of UN sanctions—with Iran once again being labeled a global threat under Chapter VII of the UN Charter—could set the stage for a major confrontation in 2025. While this echoes the harsh pre-nuclear deal era, the geopolitical landscape has shifted dramatically. This time, the world could unite to set in motion one of the toughest sanction eras for Iran or Europe might simply weaponize the move to mask its own political maneuvering.
If China and Russia do not back the sanctions, and Western states apply leniency, the impact may remain theoretical.
But a pessimistic scenario—which sees a coordinated comeback of sanctions supported by global powers—could badly harm Iran’s economy. Such restrictions would severely hit its oil sales, transit, financial services, pharmaceutical industries and wider trade.
Postponement: A chance for diplomacy or keeping pressure?
Reports of a delayed snapback mechanism and sanctions return remain unconfirmed, but media reports suggest it is being discussed in Iran-EU talks. Tehran has yet to comment, but if true, the move could signal Europe’s attempt to carve a new path toward its objectives. According to French Foreign Minister Jean Noël Barrot, Europe will negotiate with Iran through August—triggering snapback by September if no deal is reached. Europe has until October 18 to reinstate sanctions.
The key question is whether the trio made this offer to de-escalate tensions and pursue diplomacy—or if it is only a pretext to justify tougher measures via snapback. Answers may emerge during the July 25 Iran-trio meeting in Istanbul. For now, Iran remains unconvinced by the proposal, viewing nuclear-related sanctions as politically motivated and illegal from the outset. Tehran sees no advantage in allowing the West to maintain its snapback leverage.
Past negotiations have taught Iran that diplomatic overtures do not necessarily guarantee compliance and Western partners do not always honor their commitments. While preventing a repeat of previous failures (like military strikes during talks) might bring Iran back to the table, securing its core demands—especially on nuclear rights—remains essential for any deal.