Iran and Russia have unitedly rejected attempts by European powers to revive United Nations sanctions via the “snapback mechanism,” insisting that Britain, France, and Germany no longer possess legal standing to do so following their departure from the 2015 nuclear agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).
Coordinated Position
In statements issued over the weekend, both Tehran and Moscow strongly condemned recent European moves to initiate the snapback process, which would reinstate UN sanctions previously lifted under the JCPOA. Iranian officials accused European governments of political maneuvering; Russia called this attempt illegal and politically provocative.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Nasser Kanaani stated, “European parties abandoned their commitments to the JCPOA years ago and are no longer entitled to invoke mechanisms meant to ensure compliance.” Furthermore, any misuse of snapback provisions would violate international law and inflame tensions unnecessarily.
Russia Shows Support
Russia was an original signatory to the original nuclear accord and strongly supported Iran’s position after U.S. withdrawal in 2018. Maria Zakharova from Russia’s Foreign Ministry asserted that European signatories “forfeited their rights” when they stopped fulfilling obligations under JCPOA post U.S. withdrawal in 2018.
“The European troika cannot abandon their commitments while simultaneously claiming authority for an agreement they no longer respect,” Zakharova noted, as this hypocrisy undermines multilateral diplomacy. Moscow further stated its opposition to any attempts in the UN Security Council to reinstate sanctions through disputed mechanisms.
Information on Snapback Mechanism
The snapback mechanism was established under UN Security Council Resolution 2231, which approved of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2015. It allows parties to the agreement to impose sanctions if Iran is judged to have significant noncompliance, but its legality has since been called into question following U.S. withdrawal and subsequent European disengagement from it.
European officials have recently expressed alarm about Iran’s expanding nuclear program, particularly its enrichment activities, and have suggested invoking the mechanism against it. Tehran maintains that their program remains peaceful and subject to monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), even with reduced cooperation over time.
International Reactions
The dispute has attracted international interest, with Washington providing support for European concerns while sidestepping any direct statement on the legal validity of JCPOA mechanism. U.S. officials have repeatedly encouraged Iran to comply with JCPOA restrictions but also acknowledged the political difficulty involved with reviving accord.
China, another JCPOA signatory, agreed with Iran and Russia’s assessment that European nations do not have legitimacy to impose snapback sanctions. China advocated dialogue rather than escalated action and warned that additional sanctions will lead to greater instability in the Middle East region.
Diplomatically-minded analysts believe this confrontation reflects the widespread collapse of the JCPOA framework, with little hope of its revival in its original form. Instead, regional and global powers appear stuck in battles over responsibility and authority.
Iran regards resisting European pressure as an issue of sovereignty and fairness; for Russia, opposition to snapback serves both to support Iran and as part of their global challenge to Western dominance in international institutions.
As tensions escalate, the future of Iran’s nuclear program remains unclear and remains a matter of contention between Tehran, Moscow and Western capitals. What is evident, however, is that debate surrounding its snapback mechanism has become yet another source of friction in already tenuous relations among Tehran Moscow and Washington capitals.