Follow us on social

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

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
Analysis | QiOSK
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

keep readingShow less

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.