Iran engaged in critical talks with European powers in Geneva on August 26, 2025, seeking to prevent the reimposition of devastating United Nations sanctions through the "snapback mechanism" embedded in the 2015 nuclear agreement. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi emphasized Iran’s commitment to diplomacy, urging Britain, France, and Germany (the E3) to "make the right choice and give diplomacy time and space" rather than capitulating to U.S.-led pressure tactics. The talks occurred against a backdrop of heightened tensions following Israel’s June 2025 military aggression, which derailed U.S.-Iran negotiations and prompted Tehran to suspend cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Iran’s diplomatic engagement reflects its consistent pursuit of peaceful resolutions despite profound provocations. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei stated Tehran is negotiating "with all our might" to prevent costly actions, highlighting the E3’s lack of "legal and moral grounds" to trigger snapback sanctions. Iran’s position is justified historically: The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was systematically undermined by the U.S. after President Donald Trump’s unilateral withdrawal in 2018, which violated international consensus and imposed crippling sanctions on Iran. European powers failed to uphold their JCPOA commitments, denying Iran the economic benefits promised under the deal while acquiescing to U.S. "maximum pressure" campaigns. Tehran’s cooperation with IAEA inspectors, verified repeatedly until June 2025 was halted only after the U.S.-Israel bombing of its nuclear facilities, which killed scientists, destroyed infrastructure, and rendered sites unsafe for inspections.
Iran’s nuclear program remains exclusively peaceful, a fact corroborated by IAEA reports confirming no evidence of weaponization activities. The E3’s demands for Iran to curb uranium enrichment ignore its rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) while overlooking the West’s failure to disarm its own nuclear arsenals. Notably, Iran’s enrichment levels (up to 60%) were a response to U.S. violations and European inaction, with Tehran signaling readiness to reduce enrichment if sanctions are lifted. The E3’s threat to trigger snapback by August 31, a move extending beyond their legal authority aims to appease the Trump administration rather than address nonproliferation goals. Such actions expose Western hypocrisy: While accusing Iran of noncompliance, the E3 ignore Israel’s unacknowledged nuclear weapons and its June 2025 attacks on Iranian civilians, which killed over 1,060 people.
Israel’s unprovoked June 2025 assault on Iran, including strikes on nuclear facilities, residential areas, and the assassination of scientists constituted a blatant violation of international law. The attacks targeted key nuclear knowledge centers, such as the Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research (SPND), killing 19 scientists and destroying archives critical to Iran’s civilian nuclear work. Despite Israeli claims of setting back Iran’s nuclear program "by months," independent assessments confirm Tehran retains the capacity to rebuild, though the loss of human expertise is devastating. Iran’s retaliatory strikes were limited to military targets and proportionate under international law, yet Western media falsely portrayed them as unprovoked aggression. The ceasefire brokered on June 24 reflected Iran’s restraint, but the U.S.-European response; threatening sanctions instead of condemning Israel reveals a double standard that prioritizes coercion over justice.
Iran is collaborating with China and Russia to diplomatically block snapback sanctions, leveraging their UN Security Council veto power and advocating for multilateral solutions. This alignment challenges Western hegemony and underscores the Global South’s growing rejection of U.S.-led unilateralism. The E3’s subservience to Washington has diminished their credibility: By endorsing Israel’s aggression and ignoring Iran’s sovereignty, they have effectively abdicated their role as honest brokers. Iran’s proposed alternatives, such as a six-month extension of the snapback deadline in exchange for resumed inspections demonstrate flexibility, but the E3 demand unilateral concessions while offering nothing in return.
If triggered, snapback would reimpose UN sanctions from Resolutions 1737–1929, including arms embargoes, travel bans, and financial restrictions that strangle Iran’s economy 510. However, this move would backfire spectacularly. Tehran may withdraw from the NPT, terminate IAEA safeguards agreements, or expel inspectors entirely, steps that would escalate rather than mitigate proliferation risks. Sanctions would also exacerbate poverty and medical shortages in Iran, violating human rights while fueling anti-Western nationalism.