Return of UN sanctions ...
Page 1
Even if, for the sake of argument, the snapback’s instigation was not procedurally illegal, it was still “unjust and, politically, a clear blunder.” At the time, the European trio had failed to fully honor their own commitments, while the United States, having withdrawn from the JCPOA, was in a state of total non-compliance. Such actions have inflicted damage on these countries’ political credibility and soft power on the world stage.
If Iran and its partners’ interpretation of paragraph 8 is correct, then the entire debate over the legality of the snapback is moot. Once Resolution 2231 expired on October 18, 2025, any pre-2015 sanctions that might have been reinstated via this mechanism lost all legal standing.
Not long ago, Iran’s Leader said that negotiating with a party seeking to impose its own version of an agreement through coercion is meaningless. I share that sentiment. US President Donald Trump repeatedly demonstrated that he was never an honest broker in search of balance but rather a negotiator intent on forcing submission.
The realistic path forward for Iran, at this juncture, lies in strengthening and deepening ties with non-Western powers such as China, Russia, and its regional neighbors. While this strategy may prolong economic pressure and unilateral sanctions, it remains the most pragmatic option amid deep mutual distrust.
It is essential that Iran maintain its membership in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and continue its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) under its safeguards agreement. Such a course can help preserve the confidence of non-Western states and bolster Iran’s credibility in the international community.
From the standpoint of international law, the US and Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities in June were wholly illegitimate. No authorization was ever granted by the Security Council. Consequently, Israel’s military action against Iran constituted an act of aggression and a violation of the UN Charter.