When the E3 – the United Kingdom, France, and Germany – notified the United Nations in late August that Iran was in breach of its obligations under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the move marked the final blow to an agreement that once stood as a model of diplomatic compromise. The “snapback” mechanism, triggered a month later, automatically reinstated a wide array of international sanctions against Iran for its “persistent and significant nonperformance” of its nuclear commitments. It was a moment that symbolized not only the end of the JCPOA but also the collapse of a decade of diplomatic investment aimed at containing Iran’s nuclear ambitions through engagement rather than confrontation.

Yet, despite the reimposition of sanctions and the unified stance of Western powers, few analysts genuinely believe that economic pressure alone will force Tehran to reverse its nuclear trajectory. The historical record is clear: sanctions may isolate and weaken regimes, but they rarely compel them to surrender what they consider vital national interests. In Iran’s case, its nuclear program has long been tied not just to security calculations but also to political legitimacy and national pride.

The demise of the JCPOA was, in many ways, long foretold. When US President Donald Trump withdrew unilaterally from the accord in 2018 – heavily influenced by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – he did more than simply dismantle a piece of Obama-era diplomacy. He set in motion a chain reaction that destroyed the fragile balance of trust on which the agreement depended. From that moment on, the JCPOA was effectively on life support.

The E3’s recent invocation of the snapback clause merely formalized what was already true: the agreement is dead. What remains is a landscape of heightened suspicion, dwindling diplomatic options, and an increasingly emboldened Tehran that sees nuclear capability as its ultimate insurance........

© Blitz