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
Inside Israel's shadow campaign to win over American media
Top image credit: Noa Tishby poses for a photo in Jaffa in 2021 (Alon Shafransky/CC BY-SA 4.0)

Inside Israel's shadow campaign to win over American media

Washington Politics

Back in March 2011, the Israeli consulate in New York City had a problem. A group of soldiers from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) were coming to the U.S. on a PR trip, and Israeli officials needed help persuading influential media outlets to interview the delegation.

Luckily for the consulate, a new organization called Act For Israel, led by Israeli-American actor Noa Tishby, was prepared to swing into action. “[I]n mid March 2011, the New York Consulate requested our assistance,” Tishby’s organization wrote in a document revealed in a recent trove of leaked emails.

keep readingShow less
Volodymyr Zelenskyy Bart De Wever
Top image credit: President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy (R) and Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Belgium Bart De Weve in Kyiv, Ukraine When: 08 Apr 2025. Hennadii Minchenko/Ukrinform/Cover Images via REUTERS CONNECT

Europe could be on the hook for $160 billion to keep Ukraine afloat

Europe

Even if war ended tomorrow, Europe could be on the hook for 135 billion euros (nearly $160 billion) over the next two years to keep Ukraine afloat. Brussels does not appear to have a plan B up its sleeve.

I first warned in September 2024 that using immobilized Russian assets to fund war fighting in Ukraine would disincentivize Russia from suing for peace. Nothing has changed since then. Russia maintains the battlefield advantage, has the financial reserves, extremely low levels of debt by Western standards, and can afford to keep fighting, despite the human cost. Putin is self-evidently waiting the Europeans out, knowing they will run out of money before he does.

keep readingShow less
Unlike Cheney, at least McNamara tried to atone for his crimes
Top photo credit: Robert MacNamra (The Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum/public domain)

Unlike Cheney, at least McNamara tried to atone for his crimes

Washington Politics

“I know of no one in America better qualified to take over the post of Defense Secretary than Bob McNamara,” wrote Ford chief executive Henry Ford II in late 1960.

It had been only fifty-one days since the former Harvard Business School whiz had become the automaker’s president, but now he was off to Washington to join President-elect John F. Kennedy’s brain trust. At 44, about a year older than JFK, Robert S. McNamara had forged a reputation as a brilliant, if arrogant, manager and problem-solver with a computer-like mastery of facts and statistics. He seemed unstoppable.

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.