After years of violating their own commitments, the US and Europe are projecting their behavior onto Iran in order to pave the way for the next conflict.
The three Western powers—Britain, France, and Germany—have announced that they consider Iran to be in non-compliance with the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). On that basis, they are now pushing for the revival—or “snapback”—of UN Security Council sanctions first imposed more than two decades ago, and partially lifted under the JCPOA. These sanctions are supposed to return to force within 30 days, likely to be formalized at a Security Council meeting in October.
A few diplomatic contacts have now taken place. Britain’s Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, has spoken with Iran’s Foreign Minister Araqchi. The official justification for the snapback is Iran’s refusal to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) renewed access to its nuclear sites.
But this is not the full story.
Iran’s Position
Iran recently met with the IAEA but refused access to enrichment sites like Fordow and Natanz. The reason, as Tehran explains, is its loss of trust after the 12-Day War, when Iran alleges the IAEA—under Director General Rafael Grossi—shared sensitive information with the U.S. and Israel. This intelligence, Iran claims, facilitated attacks on its enrichment facilities and exposed nuclear scientists to assassination.
Iran also accuses the IAEA of failing to condemn Israeli strikes on what it insists are peaceful nuclear facilities—actions Tehran sees as violations of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. While Iran barred inspections of its enrichment sites, it did allow the IAEA access to its civilian power plant in Bushehr, built with Russian cooperation.
The IAEA left dissatisfied. The Europeans pressed Iran to reverse its decision, but Tehran stood firm. In response, Britain, France, and Germany declared Iran in breach of the JCPOA.
The Surreal Legal Landscape
Here the situation turns surreal. One of the JCPOA’s main signatories—the United States—withdrew from the deal in 2018 under Donald Trump and reimposed sweeping sanctions on Iran, far harsher than the original UN measures. The Biden administration campaigned on rejoining the JCPOA but never followed through, instead demanding new restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program and foreign policy. Tehran refused.
The U.S. has therefore been outside the JCPOA for six years. Meanwhile, the Europeans aligned themselves with Washington, effectively enforcing U.S. sanctions despite the agreement. Iran argues, justifiably so, that this itself constitutes a breach of the JCPOA by Europe. In this case, Tehran insists, Europe has no legal standing to declare Iran in violation or trigger the snapback.
Whether Iran’s position is airtight in international law is debatable. But in practice, no legal body will ever issue a definitive ruling. The dispute is political, not judicial.
What Has Actually Happened
Let’s step back. In 2015, Iran signed the JCPOA. Between 2015 and 2018, it is universally acknowledged that Tehran complied. In exchange, sanctions were meant to be lifted. That promise was never fully kept—not even under Obama.
In 2018, Trump tore up the agreement and reimposed sanctions. Since then, Iran has gradually expanded enrichment, at times exceeding JCPOA limits (up to 60%). But this followed years of what Tehran was exposed to: extreme provocation: assassinations, sabotage, and illegal military strikes on its nuclear facilities.
Israel’s mid-2025 attacks—killing 20 scientists and Iran’s chief negotiator, who had just agreed to lower enrichment to 60%—marked a breaking point. Iran accuses the IAEA of complicity, claiming its data was shared with Israel and Washington. The U.S. itself also struck Iranian facilities during this period. A short, bloody conflict followed, ending only in a shaky ceasefire.
Given this history, the notion that Iran alone is to blame for the JCPOA’s breakdown is impossible to sustain. Yes, Tehran is now breaching the deal—but only after years of Western violations and existential threats.
What Is the Snapback For?
The UN sanctions being “snapped back” add little in practice. U.S. sanctions are already far harsher, and Europe has been enforcing them for years. Russia and China—both JCPOA signatories and now Iran’s BRICS partners—reject the snapback entirely, calling it provocative and destabilizing. They will not enforce the UN sanctions and will likely deepen economic ties with Tehran.
Why, then, are the Europeans doing this?
One reason is technical: without action, UN sanctions were set to expire in October. The snapback preserves them as a legal weapon against Iran. Israel, in particular, has long lobbied against their expiration.
But the deeper motive is strategic. By declaring Iran in violation, Western governments are laying the groundwork for war. The narrative is being scripted: Iran is enriching uranium, defying inspectors, breaching UN resolutions, and therefore poses a nuclear threat. This is the argument Israel and its allies have long sought. Soon you will see the chorus grow—Western politicians, think tanks, media, and talk shows feigning outrage, priming the public, and beating the drums for yet another war against Iran.
Toward a Wider War
The implications are grave. Iran is strengthening military ties with Russia and China, but its air defense system is still in development, leaving a temporary window of vulnerability. Western hawks know this. Israel, backed by Washington, may see the coming months as its best chance to strike hard and destroy the last bastion in the region that resists Israel’s genocide and the massive land theft and unechecked expansion of this ethno-nationalist Apartheid state.
The implications are profound. Iran is bolstering its military alliances with Russia and China, but a gap in its air defenses presents a temporary vulnerability. Western hawks and Israeli officials are likely viewing this window as a prime opportunity to launch a forceful attack. Critics argue that the goal is to remove the most significant regional obstacle to Israel’s ongoing occupation and genocide, as well as its unchecked land grab.
If war comes again, it will not be a 12-day skirmish like last time. Given the already tense global situation caused by the war in Ukraine, a conflict with Iran would exacerbate the crisis in the international system and could trigger significant economic turmoil worldwide, especially since European countries are already struggling with serious economic and financial problems and the situation in the US is not much better.
The clouds of war are gathering. Europe’s decision to trigger the fallback clause is not just a legal move. It is the first step in preparing the ground for another war in the Middle East. Brace for a man-made disaster caused by the usual suspects.