Follow us on social

google cta
Macron Merz Starmer

Europe just made war with Iran more likely

France, Germany and the UK's push to reimpose UN sanctions on Tehran is just the first step

Analysis | QiOSK
google cta
google cta

France, Germany, and the UK (E3) have announced they will trigger snapback sanctions on Iran at the United Nations. This will launch a 30-day process that will likely culminate in the full reinstatement of all U.N. sanctions lifted under the 2015 nuclear deal. The move will carry four major consequences.

First, the U.N. Security Council will formally adopt the demand — pushed by Israel — that Iran cease all uranium enrichment. Israel designed this demand to sabotage nuclear diplomacy and edge the conflict toward war.

Next, a U.N. arms embargo on Iran will return, potentially curbing Tehran’s ability to rebuild deterrence against future Israeli or American strikes, provided Russia and China treat the snapback as legitimate and enforce it.

Third, Iran’s already fragile economy will deteriorate further; its currency has already taken a hit.

And finally, far from advancing diplomacy, the measure risks accelerating escalation. While Israel hardly needs a pretext to launch another strike on Iran, as I have argued, snapback could provide useful political cover — a thin veneer of legitimacy — for renewed attacks.

The E3 argues that snapback is necessary to pressure Iran into resuming talks with the U.S. and granting the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to its nuclear facilities, including disclosure of the stockpile of 60% enriched uranium.

On the surface, these demands may seem reasonable. But Tehran has legitimate reservations. Iranian officials suspect the IAEA of leaking sensitive information that enabled Mossad’s assassination campaign against their nuclear scientists, and they fear that revealing the stockpile’s location could simply invite another round of U.S. airstrikes.

Moreover, Iran was at the negotiating table when Israel and the U.S. began bombing it. The E3 now insists Tehran return to talks, yet they make no parallel demand that Washington refrain from bombing again.

Perhaps most importantly, given the unbridgeable gap over enrichment, Trump’s limited patience for diplomacy, and Israeli pressure to resume hostilities, restarting talks that are almost certain to collapse — unless both sides show greater flexibility on enrichment — only increases the likelihood that war will start sooner rather than later..

But that may well be the point. The E3 of today bears little resemblance to the one of two decades ago. When it was created in 2003, its purpose was to prevent the Bush administration — fresh off its disastrous and illegal invasion of Iraq — from launching another war, this time against Iran.

Today, the geopolitical context has shifted. Iran’s alignment with Russia in Ukraine has recast it as a direct threat in Europe’s eyes. The EU is also far more dependent on the transatlantic relationship than it was 20 years ago, while successive rounds of sanctions have rendered Iran a negligible economic partner for Europe.

Escalation with Iran through snapback now serves two EU objectives: punishing Tehran for supporting Russia in Ukraine, and aligning Europe with hawkish elements in the Trump administration — an alignment calculated to ease tensions in other areas of a transatlantic relationship under unprecedented duress.

In this sense, the E3 constellation that was designed in 2003 to prevent war may, in 2025, be pushing us closer to one.

But don’t take it from me. After all, Germany’s chancellor has openly admitted that Israel “did Europe’s dirty work for it” by bombing Iran in June.


Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Germany?s Chancellor Friedrich Merz and Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer pose as they meet on the sidelines of the two-day NATO's Heads of State and Government summit, in The Hague, Netherlands June 24, 2025. Ludovic Marin/Pool via REUTERS
google cta
Analysis | QiOSK
Trump Polk
Top image credit: Samuele Wikipediano 1348 via wikimedia commons/lev radin via shutterstock.com

On Greenland, Trump wants to be like Polk

Washington Politics

Any hopes that Wednesday’s meeting of Greenland and Denmark’s foreign ministers with Vice President Vance and Secretary Rubio might point toward an end of the Trump administration’s attempts to annex the semiautonomous arctic territory were swiftly disappointed. “Fundamental disagreement” remains, according to Danish Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen.

That these talks would yield no hint of a resolution should not be surprising. Much of Trump’s stated rationale for seeking ownership of Greenland — the need for an increased U.S. military presence, the ability to access the island’s critical mineral deposits, or the alleged imperative to keep the Chinese and Russians at bay — is eminently negotiable and even achievable under the status quo. If these were the president’s real goals he likely could have reached an agreement with Denmark months ago. That this standoff persists is a testament to Trump’s true motive: ownership for its own sake.

keep readingShow less
Swedish military Greenland

Top photo credit: HAGSHULT, SWEDEN- 7 MAY 2024: Military guards during the US Army exercise Swift Response 24 at the Hagshult base, Småland county, Sweden, during Tuesday. (Shutterstock/Sunshine Seeds)

Trump digs in as Europe sends troops to Greenland

Europe

Wednesday’s talks between American, Danish, and Greenlandic officials exposed the unbridgeable gulf between President Trump’s territorial ambitions and respect for sovereignty.

Trump now claims the U.S. needs Greenland to support the Golden Dome missile defense initiative. Meanwhile, European leaders are sending a small number of troops to Greenland.

keep readingShow less
Congress
Top image credit: VideoFlow via shutterstock.com

Congress should walk Trump's talk on arms industry stock buybacks

Military Industrial Complex

The Trump administration’s new executive order to curb arms industry stock buybacks — which boost returns for shareholders — has no teeth, but U.S. lawmakers could and should take advantage.

The White House issued an Executive Order on Jan. 7 to prevent contractors “from putting stock buybacks and excessive corporate distributions ahead of production capacity, innovation, and on-time delivery for America’s military." The order empowers the Defense Secretary to "take steps to ensure that future contracts prohibit stock buybacks and corporate distributions during periods of underperformance, non-compliance, insufficient prioritization or investment, or insufficient production speed."

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.